[FairfieldLife] Subliminal advertising
As a person of the Buddhistic persuasion, I've always been fascinated by advertising. It is, after all, the intentional attempt to implant desire in people, and as most know, many Buddhists tend to believe that desires -- or at the very least the attachment to one's desires -- is ego-binding, and thus not completely desirable. Still, ya gotta appreciate the creativity with which some ad people implant subliminal messages into seemingly innocuous ads, to hopefully trigger equally subliminal desires, and thus sell more of the product. As an example, have you found yourself eating at Wendy's more often these days? They don't have them here in France, but as I remember, they actually had salads and foods that even a vegetarian could enjoy. But is their cooking *really* like Mom's? http://stocklogos.com/topic/hidden-message-new-wendys-logo http://stocklogos.com/topic/hidden-message-new-wendys-logo
[FairfieldLife] Tyrannosaurus Was Active Predator!
I'm sure you'll all be as relieved to hear this as I was. They are just so much *cooler* that way.. T rex tooth found embedded in prey, restoring dinosaur's reputation Tooth lodged in plant-eating dinosaur's spine proves that T rex wasn't just a scavenger but also hunted live prey [Tyrannosaurus rex (T rex) eats a dead Triceratops] New evidence suggests T rex was capable of bringing down live prey rather than simply scavenging dinosaur carcasses. Photograph: Corey Ford/Corbis Threats to the fearsome reputation of Tyrannosaurus rex appeared to have been seen off on Monday by fresh evidence unearthed in the US. The dinosaur's feeding habits have long been debated by academics, with some claiming that T rex was less a ferocious hunter and more a lumbering slowcoach that scavenged the carcasses of beasts that had died at the claws of others. The latest evidence comes from palaeontologists who found remnants of a prehistoric skirmish in a slab of rock at the Hell Creek Formation in South Dakota. The clash, which occurred around 66m years ago, involved a T rexand a large, plant-eating hadrosaur, and ended with the tooth of the former lodged firmly in the spine of the latter. Scans of the tooth and two surrounding tail vertebrae showed clear signs of bone healing around the wound, taken as proof that the hadrosaur was alive at the time of the attack and survived for several months or even years afterwards. This is unambiguous evidence that T rex was an active predator, the authors write in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1216534110 . Such evidence is rare in the fossil record for good reason prey rarely escapes. Tyrannosaurs shed their teeth frequently as fresh sets came through. In this case a weaker rear tooth broke free as the T rex, which was not fully-grown, chomped on the hadrosaur's tail. The hadrosaur is believed to have been an adult Edmontosaur, which grew to around 10 metres in length. [T rex tooth embedded between hadrosaur vertebrae] The tooth crown is embedded between two hadrosaur vertebrae and the bone has healed over. Photograph: David A Burnham We not only have a broken-off tooth embedded in the bone of another animal, but the bone has healed over the wound, and a nasty wound it was too, said David Burnham at Palm Beach Museum of Natural History http://www.pbmnh.org/researchandcollections/DepartmentofPaleontology.ht\ m in Florida. The remains join a large collection of fossils http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/fossils that tell their own partial stories about the dining habits of T rex. Previous discoveries reveal rake, puncture and chew marks on bones, while one specimen an impressive half-metre of fossilised faeces http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v393/n6686/full/393680a0.html contained partly digested dinosaur bones. In all of these cases, it is hard to differentiate between predation and scavenging. Palaeontologists expressed mixed reactions to the latest findings. Jack Horner at the Museum of the Rockies in Montana http://www.montana.edu/wwwes/facstaff/horner.htm , who served as technical adviser on the Jurassic Park movies, said: This one piece of evidence does seem to suggest that a tyrannosaur bit a hadrosaur, but certainly doesn't provide any indication of the sort of carnivore the rex actually was. In 2011 Horner and his team reported that T rex was probably an opportunistic carnivore like hyena, which take carrion and occasional live prey. This paper certainly offers no evidence to refute that hypothesis, Horner added. Paul Barrett http://www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curation/about-science/staff-directory/ea\ rth-sciences/p-barrett/index.html , a dinosaur researcher at the Natural History Museum in London, expressed exasperation that the debate was still ongoing. The whole T rexscavenger or predator debate is pretty intractable and not particularly enlightening. Work on living carnivores, like big cats and wolves, clearly show they use both strategies depending on what's available to them. They'll generally make do with a meal from either source if it satisfies their dietary needs. Any other extinct carnivore, including T rex, is likely to have been the same, he said. This paper shows without question that a T rex bit a living hadrosaur, but it can't show if this was a regular behaviour or not, or even if this was hunting behaviour rather than some other kind of interaction, he added. But Sam Turvey http://www.zsl.org/science/ioz-staff-students/dr-samuel-turvey/ , a senior research fellow at the Institute of Zoology http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/zoology in London, called it important and convincing new evidence. Even though T rex may have fed on carcasses when the opportunity arose a behaviour also seen in modern-day carnivorous large mammals such as lions the new findings provide strong evidence that these iconic dinosaurs http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/dinosaurs were fully
[FairfieldLife] I create my reality Yeah, right...
A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: I was going to remember to post about this, but I forgot...
Oh - yeah, OK. Good one - kind of like Momento, The Bar. I speak about as much french as a wine bottle label. I still think you oughta go in, if you operate from a base of fear, though. Bottoms up! :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: Kinda like when I see some vintage car on the road. I enjoy just looking at it. Don't have to get in. If you operate from a dynamic of fear, you *must* visit the bar, imo. If not, who (the fuck) cares, right? Lighten up, Jimbo. My comment was a joke, albeit a bilingual one and possibly not very accessible. Oublier = to forget, and an oubliette was an old type of prison in which they threw people to be forgotten. I was just having fun trying to imagine a bar in which every time you went there you had a great time, but afterwards you could never remember going there, so for all you know it could be the same great time over and over again. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: In my new 'hood in Paris there is a bar called Le caveau des Oubliettes. Every time I walk past it, I think, Wow. That place looks *fascinating*. I should definitely stop and have a drink in there. Strangely enough, however, I cannot find any memory of ever having followed up on this thought, and no memory of having been in the place at all. Is that bad? :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] That time that America gave a whistleblower asylum
Great little gotcha article from Gawker, which points out the hypocrisy of the US government getting all pissy because other countries want to give Ed Snowdon immunity for blowing the whistle on America's tendency to spy on EVERYBODY, including its own citizens. http://gawker.com/790162223 I love the part where they find the Iowa Republican Senator's comments about Snowdon recently, and place them side-by-side with his comments about Christopher Meili only 16 years ago.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Interesting. Does that mean that during the seven months you were posting to FFL as 'enlightened_dawn11' and pre- tending to be a woman you actually *became* a woman? That must have been fascinating for you. How did you find shoes that fit you? :-) :-) :-) Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. [Enlightenment] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-\ reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
No, it really means just what I said. If the mind is spinning constantly, and never given a break from its thoughts, each thought is weak. The personality that emerges from such a mind is chaotic, despite its most fervent intentions to be otherwise. However, if thoughts are used appropriately, and sparingly, as vehicles of power, and focus, then there is a much greater chance of our reflecting into the world who we truly are, and want to be. Otherwise, we give away our birthright, and live pot-luck. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Interesting. Does that mean that during the seven months you were posting to FFL as 'enlightened_dawn11' and pre- tending to be a woman you actually *became* a woman? That must have been fascinating for you. How did you find shoes that fit you? :-) :-) :-) Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. [Enlightenment] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-\ reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] The human brain
[https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/q71/s720x720/101\ 1483_376542529134355_154331957_n.jpg]
Re: [FairfieldLife] I create my reality Yeah, right...
Loved it, turq, thanks for posting. I appreciate the subtle and practical distinctions the author makes here. Favorite bit: accept the fixed, work with the fluid. And actually, just about every article listed on the left looked worth at least a glance. Might have to sign up. Hope Nabby doesn't get too upset with me (-: From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 3:53 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] I create my reality Yeah, right... A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Loved it, turq, thanks for posting. I appreciate the subtle and practical distinctions the author makes here. Favorite bit: accept the fixed, work with the fluid. That's a new one for ya, huh? Well, better late than never. And actually, just about every article listed on the left looked worth at least a glance. Might have to sign up. Hope Nabby doesn't get too upset with me (-: I'm tempted to post the list here, but anyone who's interested can just click the link below and see for themselves. ;-) From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 3:53 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] I create my reality Yeah, right... A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Oh, and a really snappy phrase from FFL's writer-in- residence: stale cyber-chatrooms of New Age thought. (cough, cough) Barry tells us he never goes back to revise what he writes. That's fortunate; if he did, we might be deprived of gems like the above. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. He likes this because she sorta writes like Barry. She even ends it with one of his more hackneyed lines I dare you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] The Usual Run Around
So, now that Barry is barraging us with small distractions in the form of advertisements, jokes and New Age articles what about that misleading post, eh? What do you have to say about your manipulative nasty post message of a couple of days ago? As I thought - nothing. Because you lack the spine to ever address what you do when it involves manipulation and lying. You simply pointed that crooked finger of yours at everyone for taking exception to the fact that you knowingly told a bunch of big fat lies. You are, interestingly, despicable. Funny how you gravitate to a couple of kid's flicks that are named, appropriately enough, Despicable Me. Maybe some deeper, Buddhist part of your overworked brain recognizes yourself in that title. Wanna talk about it? I dare you.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Usual Run Around
Barry has crooked fingers? From: Ann awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] The Usual Run Around So, now that Barry is barraging us with small distractions in the form of advertisements, jokes and New Age articles what about that misleading post, eh? What do you have to say about your manipulative nasty post message of a couple of days ago? As I thought - nothing. Because you lack the spine to ever address what you do when it involves manipulation and lying. You simply pointed that crooked finger of yours at everyone for taking exception to the fact that you knowingly told a bunch of big fat lies. You are, interestingly, despicable. Funny how you gravitate to a couple of kid's flicks that are named, appropriately enough, Despicable Me. Maybe some deeper, Buddhist part of your overworked brain recognizes yourself in that title. Wanna talk about it? I dare you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Usual Run Around
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: Barry has crooked fingers? Cut her some slack, Michael. Ann's having a hard day: From: Ann awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] The Usual Run Around So, now that Barry is barraging us with small distractions in the form of advertisements, jokes and New Age articles what about that misleading post, eh? What do you have to say about your manipulative nasty post message of a couple of days ago? As I thought - nothing. Because you lack the spine to ever address what you do when it involves manipulation and lying. You simply pointed that crooked finger of yours at everyone for taking exception to the fact that you knowingly told a bunch of big fat lies. You are, interestingly, despicable. Funny how you gravitate to a couple of kid's flicks that are named, appropriately enough, Despicable Me. Maybe some deeper, Buddhist part of your overworked brain recognizes yourself in that title. Wanna talk about it? I dare you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Usual Run Around
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: Barry has crooked fingers? Cut her some slack, Michael. Ann's having a hard day: Uh oh, somebody's button just got pushed. LoL! From: Ann awoelflebater@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] The Usual Run Around So, now that Barry is barraging us with small distractions in the form of advertisements, jokes and New Age articles what about that misleading post, eh? What do you have to say about your manipulative nasty post message of a couple of days ago? As I thought - nothing. Because you lack the spine to ever address what you do when it involves manipulation and lying. You simply pointed that crooked finger of yours at everyone for taking exception to the fact that you knowingly told a bunch of big fat lies. You are, interestingly, despicable. Funny how you gravitate to a couple of kid's flicks that are named, appropriately enough, Despicable Me. Maybe some deeper, Buddhist part of your overworked brain recognizes yourself in that title. Wanna talk about it? I dare you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Subliminal advertising
turquoiseb: As a person of the Buddhistic persuasion, I've always been fascinated by advertising. One of the last things the historical did Buddha before he passed away was to instruct Ananda to raise a stupa at the crossroads in order to remind people of Enlightenment. Apparently the idea' worked in your case. Go figure. Does outdoor advertising work? Just did! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stupa It is, after all, the intentional attempt to implant desire in people, and as most know, many Buddhists tend to believe that desires -- or at the very least the attachment to one's desires -- is ego-binding, and thus not completely desirable. Let's note here that a desire to be rid of desire is a desire. The answer to this riddle is the Buddha's Middle Way; don't desire to not desire to extremes. A stupa is a circular dome with a series of fences surrounding it, arranged in traditional patterns with a harmika and an umbrella on the top. For example, the Great Buddhist Stupa at Sanch:. Edifice architecture and the Axis-mundi: http://rwilliams.us/archives/analogia.htm http://rwilliams.us/archives/analogia.htm Still, ya gotta appreciate the creativity with which some ad people implant subliminal messages into seemingly innocuous ads, to hopefully trigger equally subliminal desires, and thus sell more of the product. The posters you put up for MMY and Rama should have said something about this instead of promising enlightenment in 5-7 years or instant enlightenment. LoL! You are only going to get as much enlightenment as you are going to get. As an example, have you found yourself eating at Wendy's more often these days? They don't have them here in France, but as I remember, they actually had salads and foods that even a vegetarian could enjoy. But is their cooking *really* like Mom's? Now that's better!
[FairfieldLife] Gary Weber: New Interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump - 07/16/2013
blog updates from Buddha at the Gas Pump http://gallery.mailchimp.com/e709a491029b04e745834d34d/images/star.gif published 07/16/2013 183. Gary Weber http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=614228b5b1e=16e07f16fe Jul 15, 2013 07:59 am | Rick Biographies seem to be of intense interest to many folk. It is not clear what purpose they serve, positive or negative, but as others include them, here is one. It is important to remember that a biography is only one … Continue reading http://batgap.us2.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=a877b0f834e=16e07f16fe → The post 183. Gary Weber http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=bb216c3715e=16e07f16fe appeared first on Buddha at the Gas Pump http://batgap.us2.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=8c725618b6e=16e07f16fe . comments http://batgap.us2.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=bc989861c8e=16e07f16fe | read more http://batgap.us2.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=aec4819b2ce=16e07f16fe http://batgap.us2.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=4c06c04ec3e=16e07f16fe http://batgap.us2.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=b216102c7fe=16e07f16fe http://batgap.us2.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=12f1695028e=16e07f16fe http://gallery.mailchimp.com/e709a491029b04e745834d34d/images/frond.gif Elsewhere * http://batgap.us2.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=c950f98635e=16e07f16fe Visit My Blog * http://us2.forward-to-friend1.com/forward?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=176a8368bde=16e07f16fe Share This with a friend * http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=66309903c6e=16e07f16fe Follow me on Twitter * http://batgap.us2.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=1da6356f31e=16e07f16fe RSS feed http://gallery.mailchimp.com/e709a491029b04e745834d34d/images/shim.gif view email in a browser http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=176a8368bde=16e07f16fe | Regular announcement of new interviews posted at http://batgap.com. Buddha at the Gas Pump 1108 South B Street Fairfield, Iowa 52556 Add us to your address book http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/vcard?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=b0e5d0d53a Copyright (C) 2013 Buddha at the Gas Pump All rights reserved. http://www.mailchimp.com/monkey-rewards/?utm_source=freemium_newsletterutm_medium=emailutm_campaign=monkey_rewardsaid=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5afl=1 http://batgap.us2.list-manage.com/track/open.php?u=62b7e50ba8598f35e2edf91d5id=176a8368bde=16e07f16fe
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Usual Run Around
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson mjackson74@... wrote: Barry has crooked fingers? I love you MJ: his fingers are the least of his crooked problems! From: Ann awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] The Usual Run Around  So, now that Barry is barraging us with small distractions in the form of advertisements, jokes and New Age articles what about that misleading post, eh? What do you have to say about your manipulative nasty post message of a couple of days ago? As I thought - nothing. Because you lack the spine to ever address what you do when it involves manipulation and lying. You simply pointed that crooked finger of yours at everyone for taking exception to the fact that you knowingly told a bunch of big fat lies. You are, interestingly, despicable. Funny how you gravitate to a couple of kid's flicks that are named, appropriately enough, Despicable Me. Maybe some deeper, Buddhist part of your overworked brain recognizes yourself in that title. Wanna talk about it? I dare you.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Usual Run Around
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: Barry has crooked fingers? Cut her some slack, Michael. Ann's having a hard day: So perfect Barry, you have once again deflected all responsibility onto others. You are as spineless as you are predictable. But I had to at least give you a chance to explain yourself - and you did. From: Ann awoelflebater@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] The Usual Run Around So, now that Barry is barraging us with small distractions in the form of advertisements, jokes and New Age articles what about that misleading post, eh? What do you have to say about your manipulative nasty post message of a couple of days ago? As I thought - nothing. Because you lack the spine to ever address what you do when it involves manipulation and lying. You simply pointed that crooked finger of yours at everyone for taking exception to the fact that you knowingly told a bunch of big fat lies. You are, interestingly, despicable. Funny how you gravitate to a couple of kid's flicks that are named, appropriately enough, Despicable Me. Maybe some deeper, Buddhist part of your overworked brain recognizes yourself in that title. Wanna talk about it? I dare you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Usual Run Around
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams richard@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: Barry has crooked fingers? Yes, indeed, the fingers Barry uses to point at his enemies are as crooked as pretzels, and if you look closely, you'll find they end up pointing back at himself. Cut her some slack, Michael. Ann's having a hard day: Uh oh, somebody's button just got pushed. LoL! Sure did. Barry's had a long run of exceptionally hard days, a couple of weeks' worth at least, every one of them created by Barry himself. His buttons are *very* sore at this point, and the more people call attention to his misbehavior, the more excruciating is his discomfort. As Ann notes, his recent barrage of jokes and funny ads and New Age articles and lighthearted conversations with Share are all an attempt to bury what he doesn't want anyone to think about, the recent catastrophes he has brought on himself. I just wanted to add one point to Ann's expert analysis. Not only was Barry's accusation of his enemies' purported obsession with posters who had long left the forum a lie, it was a lie that did what I described above: it pointed right back at him. As it turns out--we all pretty much knew this already-- it's Barry who obsesses, not us. The same source that provided Barry with the statistics whose import he so deliberately mischaracterized, Yahoo Advanced Search, gives us a statistic that *accurately* characterizes his own behavior, the very behavior of which he falsely accuses his enemies. Just since Robin's last post here on April 6, Barry has made *75* posts mentioning Robin--*most of them* original mentions, and *most of them* vicious attacks on Robin. If you're skeptical, it's easy to prove: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/msearch?date=afterDM=3DD=5DY=2013DM2=DD2=DY2=AM=containsAT=turquoisebSM=containsST=MM=containsMT=robincharset=UTF-8 http://tinyurl.com/o2afqx3 This link will take you to the Yahoo Advanced Search list of those posts, with a few lines from each highlighting the mention. In most cases you can tell from those few lines that the post was an attack; with others you'd have to click on the post title and read the post itself to see. The link is to just the first page of 10 hits; there's a total of eight pages. XENO, you might want to think about going through them and finding any that do *not* fit the characterization of obsessive Robin-hatred (you'd quote only those, and there wouldn't be too many). Seems like the perfect job for you after your analysis of Judy's mentions of Curtis. From: Ann awoelflebater@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] The Usual Run Around So, now that Barry is barraging us with small distractions in the form of advertisements, jokes and New Age articles what about that misleading post, eh? What do you have to say about your manipulative nasty post message of a couple of days ago? As I thought - nothing. Because you lack the spine to ever address what you do when it involves manipulation and lying. You simply pointed that crooked finger of yours at everyone for taking exception to the fact that you knowingly told a bunch of big fat lies. You are, interestingly, despicable. Funny how you gravitate to a couple of kid's flicks that are named, appropriately enough, Despicable Me. Maybe some deeper, Buddhist part of your overworked brain recognizes yourself in that title. Wanna talk about it? I dare you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Usual Run Around
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: Barry has crooked fingers? Cut her some slack, Michael. Ann's having a hard day: [30_bliss.jpg] From: Ann awoelflebater@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:57 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] The Usual Run Around So, now that Barry is barraging us with small distractions in the form of advertisements, jokes and New Age articles what about that misleading post, eh? What do you have to say about your manipulative nasty post message of a couple of days ago? As I thought - nothing. Because you lack the spine to ever address what you do when it involves manipulation and lying. You simply pointed that crooked finger of yours at everyone for taking exception to the fact that you knowingly told a bunch of big fat lies. You are, interestingly, despicable. Funny how you gravitate to a couple of kid's flicks that are named, appropriately enough, Despicable Me. Maybe some deeper, Buddhist part of your overworked brain recognizes yourself in that title. Wanna talk about it? I dare you.
Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]
Emily, excerpted from Judy's post to which I was referring: Whatever he may have said or not said to you in private weeks ago...There is no basis for you to demand behind-the-scenes negotiations. So your use of *dishonest place* doesn't make sense to me! From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:42 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] snip Also, Share, nothing you said here makes any sense at all. Just an observation for you. Every time you sink into some kind of revenge post - it backfires on you because you can't think clearly from a dishonest place. On Jul 15, 2013, at 7:13 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: Ravi and Doc, yep funny how Judy and others referred to Robin's emails to me as private whereas when she referred to my alleged demands for such, she used the term behind the scenes. So, Robin sends private emails to Share but Share *demands* emails that are *behind the scenes* Go figure! Here's an editorial exercise exploring connotations by reversing Judy's wordings: Last month Robin emailed Share *behind the scenes.* AND Share has demanded that the upsets between her and Robin be discussed via private emails. Private and demanded being Judy's word choices. Share says: I have requested that Robin and I discuss our upsets via direct, offline emails. From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 9:56 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] Barry attempted to email me privately, too - And from Ravi joking about turq: - sorry for emailing you privately man. I apologize for making up outrageous lies about you, but I am the official spokesman for The Liars Inc, so hope you understand. Truth be told I have a huge crush on you and I so want to be like you. So please feel free to write to me on FFL anytime.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Words fail me......
On 07/15/2013 10:49 PM, salyavin808 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: On 07/15/2013 02:34 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: On 07/15/2013 12:49 PM, salyavin808 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: The obvious next step, although it costs a bit more, is for those who feel that they are afflicted by various planets to hire someone to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Although I have never been really into astrology except as enter- taining bullshit, for some reason I still remember the opening paragraph of an article I read back in 1967 in Haight-Ashbury. It was in a short-lived but interesting mag named Innerspace, and its subject matter was usually...uh...psychedelics. But in this one issue, someone wrote an article whose opener still sticks in my mind, probably verbatim. It read: As all astrologers and competent bullshitters know, the malefic influence of the planet Saturn has been long established. Given its well-documented ill effects on the planet Earth and its people, we believe that the only reasonable thing we can do as a species is to band together, person with person, nation with nation, and create an international project to send up rockets armed with nuclear missiles and blow the big, greasy sonofabitch out of the sky. :-) Quite right, those pesky planets have bossed us around for too long! My first thoughts went to astrology too actually. Specifically Tony Nader's book of discoveries in which he has a diagram of the brain linking to the planets (some of them anyway) so why not - if palmistry surgery proves effective* - offer brain surgery to re-align the parts of the brain so that any negative influence from having, say, venus in the first house at birth could be shifted to effectively having it in the second house - which I'm sure we all agree is much better - by simply moving some of the pituitary gland to the median oblongata. Simples. I can see a potential market for it. People buy yagyas after all. *And even if it doesn't! Most palmists would have a laugh at the article because changing the palm lines through surgery won't change destiny. Palmistry, for some reason, does reflect a lot of life events. Plus it once had a line of good looking young Playboy Mansion women lining for me to read their palms. You and Turq can eat your hearts out. :-D Homeopathic Accident and Emergency http://youtu.be/HMGIbOGu8q0 Yup, that's about the level of understanding most naysayers have. FYI, alternative physicians say conventional medicine is FOR traumatic injuries and good at it. Q: What do you call alternative medicine that has been proved to work? A: Medicine. Yes, medicine can be all kinds of things including herbs, vitamin supplements and even homeopathic remedies. Perhaps armchair scientists ought to actually study about medicine rather than just worship at the shrine of big pharma supported medicine.
[FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]
Does anybody have *any* idea what the loon's problem is? Both of her posts have been complete gibberish. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Emily, excerpted from Judy's post to which I was referring: Whatever he may have said or not said to you in private weeks ago...There is no basis for you to demand behind-the-scenes negotiations. So your use of *dishonest place* doesn't make sense to me! From: Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:42 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] snip  Also, Share, nothing you said here makes any sense at all.  Just an observation for you.  Every time you sink into some kind of revenge post - it backfires on you because you can't think clearly from a dishonest place.   On Jul 15, 2013, at 7:13 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote:  Ravi and Doc, yep funny how Judy and others referred to Robin's emails to me as private whereas when she referred to my alleged demands for such, she used the term behind the scenes. So, Robin sends private emails to Share but Share *demands* emails that are *behind the scenes* Go figure! Here's an editorial exercise exploring connotations by reversing Judy's wordings: Last month Robin emailed Share *behind the scenes.* AND Share has demanded that the upsets between her and Robin be discussed via private emails. Private and demanded being Judy's word choices. Share says: I have requested that Robin and I discuss our upsets via direct, offline emails. From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 9:56 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]  Barry attempted to email me privately, too - And from Ravi joking about turq: - sorry for emailing you privately man. I apologize for making up outrageous lies about you, but I am the official spokesman for The Liars Inc, so hope you understand. Truth be told I have a huge crush on you and I so want to be like you. So please feel free to write to me on FFL anytime.
[FairfieldLife] levitation with acoustic waves
http://www.kurzweilai.net/levitation-with-acoustic-waves?utm_source=KurzweilAI+Daily+Newsletter
[FairfieldLife] Knowing where you'll be in the future
Not astrology but science. :-D http://www.fastcompany.com/3014307/leadership-now/do-you-know-where-youll-be-285-days-from-now-at-2-pm-these-data-masters-do Guess that won't make the free willers happy.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Knowing where you'll be in the future
This is common sense, based on people that have predictable routines - job, kids, grocery story, workout schedule, etc. What a waste of time. From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:27 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Knowing where you'll be in the future Not astrology but science. :-D http://www.fastcompany.com/3014307/leadership-now/do-you-know-where-youll-be-285-days-from-now-at-2-pm-these-data-masters-do Guess that won't make the free willers happy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Knowing where you'll be in the future
I can see lots of apps for this data, though. Mapping predictable social behavior to optimize traffic flows, and energy use, even fighting crime by reallocating cops. Of course, once I get a notice on my phone that I cannot travel to San Francisco on Tuesdays, anymore, because the regional predictive algorithm has rescheduled that particular carbon footprint for someone else, I'll be pissed. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: This is common sense, based on people that have predictable routines - job, kids, grocery story, workout schedule, etc.  What a waste of time.  From: Bhairitu noozguru@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:27 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Knowing where you'll be in the future  Not astrology but science. :-D http://www.fastcompany.com/3014307/leadership-now/do-you-know-where-youll-be-285-days-from-now-at-2-pm-these-data-masters-do Guess that won't make the free willers happy.
Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]
My apologies Share - none of my business. I often don't understand what you write, by the way, and particularly so when you are reactively writing. It shows up in your sentence structure. My observation around your behavior was a general one related to your tendency when you write what I term revenge posts. I have my own behavior to be accountable for, so will leave you to yours. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 8:42 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] Emily, excerpted from Judy's post to which I was referring: Whatever he may have said or not said to you in private weeks ago...There is no basis for you to demand behind-the-scenes negotiations. So your use of *dishonest place* doesn't make sense to me! From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:42 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] snip Also, Share, nothing you said here makes any sense at all. Just an observation for you. Every time you sink into some kind of revenge post - it backfires on you because you can't think clearly from a dishonest place. On Jul 15, 2013, at 7:13 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: Ravi and Doc, yep funny how Judy and others referred to Robin's emails to me as private whereas when she referred to my alleged demands for such, she used the term behind the scenes. So, Robin sends private emails to Share but Share *demands* emails that are *behind the scenes* Go figure! Here's an editorial exercise exploring connotations by reversing Judy's wordings: Last month Robin emailed Share *behind the scenes.* AND Share has demanded that the upsets between her and Robin be discussed via private emails. Private and demanded being Judy's word choices. Share says: I have requested that Robin and I discuss our upsets via direct, offline emails. From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 9:56 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] Barry attempted to email me privately, too - And from Ravi joking about turq: - sorry for emailing you privately man. I apologize for making up outrageous lies about you, but I am the official spokesman for The Liars Inc, so hope you understand. Truth be told I have a huge crush on you and I so want to be like you. So please feel free to write to me on FFL anytime.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Knowing where you'll be in the future
O.K. As a planning tool then. Very funny last statement. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: I can see lots of apps for this data, though. Mapping predictable social behavior to optimize traffic flows, and energy use, even fighting crime by reallocating cops. Of course, once I get a notice on my phone that I cannot travel to San Francisco on Tuesdays, anymore, because the regional predictive algorithm has rescheduled that particular carbon footprint for someone else, I'll be pissed. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: This is common sense, based on people that have predictable routines - job, kids, grocery story, workout schedule, etc.  What a waste of time.  From: Bhairitu noozguru@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:27 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Knowing where you'll be in the future  Not astrology but science. :-D http://www.fastcompany.com/3014307/leadership-now/do-you-know-where-youll-be-285-days-from-now-at-2-pm-these-data-masters-do Guess that won't make the free willers happy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Â I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
So, *you* don't exist? I have the hardest time with this concept. *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Â I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
I am not surprised - I always challenge it, too. It is a matter of core identity. I exist less locally, or perhaps more subtly, than I used to, although I have undying reverence for the vehicle I currently inhabit. I also act appropriately to my personality. That reflects my life experience in this vehicle, this temple I inhabit for this life's journey. So, when I contrast myself with the writer of the article, it is not black and white thinking. We all have a personal sense of self, a personality, an individual body, and thoughts and emotions that go along with that. Also, in terms of learning any lessons, and building any character in this lifetime, I am all I have! All of that, that I described above. However, I tend to experience life and myself as a wholeness, more graceful, more expansive, stronger in the face of any obstacle, and perhaps that is simply the wisdom of being older. So, I certainly exist, but enjoyably often don't care to make a big distinction between me locally, and me, um, un-locally. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: So, *you* don't exist? Â I have the hardest time with this concept. Â *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Â Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... ÃÂ I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: So, *you* don't exist? I have the hardest time with this concept. *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-\ reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Usual Run Around
mjackson: Barry has crooked fingers? u jellos? LoL!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
So, the essence of *you* does exist, but you experience *you* as housed, for all practical purposes on this planet within a body (vehicle), but the *you* (the personal consciousness and attendant personality characteristics of you) is a fluid aspect of a larger un-local (what is un-local?) objective consciousness? or energy field? Following the idea of you/your personal energy or self - extending expansively beyond your physical body (and I'm not arguing the validity of this concept), are you not still actually *you* and yes, distinguished, from however you are defining the un-local? From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:17 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... I am not surprised - I always challenge it, too. It is a matter of core identity. I exist less locally, or perhaps more subtly, than I used to, although I have undying reverence for the vehicle I currently inhabit. I also act appropriately to my personality. That reflects my life experience in this vehicle, this temple I inhabit for this life's journey. So, when I contrast myself with the writer of the article, it is not black and white thinking. We all have a personal sense of self, a personality, an individual body, and thoughts and emotions that go along with that. Also, in terms of learning any lessons, and building any character in this lifetime, I am all I have! All of that, that I described above. However, I tend to experience life and myself as a wholeness, more graceful, more expansive, stronger in the face of any obstacle, and perhaps that is simply the wisdom of being older. So, I certainly exist, but enjoyably often don't care to make a big distinction between me locally, and me, um, un-locally. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: So, *you* don't exist?  I have the hardest time with this concept.  *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...  Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...  I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Lindsay Lohan Set to Make $2 Million after Rehab
Yes, that's right. Oprah Winfrey will interview her about undisclosed subjects for a handsome fee. http://www.upi.com/blog/2013/07/14/Lindsay-Lohan-set-for-post-rehab-reality-show-Oprah-interview/1611373844621/?spt=fsbor=ros Astrologically, Lohan is primed for a revival of her career. The present transit of Jupiter on her natal Sun is activating her showbiz planets, Venus and Mercury placed in her first house. It's also possible that she may find a new beau which eventually could lead to marriage. Overall, the next three years look good for her professionally and personally.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
For most practical purposes, YES, absolutely!!! Thanks for following all of this...identity spaghetti.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: So, the essence of *you* does exist, but you experience *you* as housed, for all practical purposes on this planet within a body (vehicle), but the *you* (the personal consciousness and attendant personality characteristics of you) is a fluid aspect of a larger un-local (what is un-local?) objective consciousness? or energy field?  Following the idea of you/your personal energy or self -  extending expansively beyond your physical body (and I'm not arguing the validity of this concept), are you not still actually *you* and yes, distinguished, from however you are defining the un-local? From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:17 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...  I am not surprised - I always challenge it, too. It is a matter of core identity. I exist less locally, or perhaps more subtly, than I used to, although I have undying reverence for the vehicle I currently inhabit. I also act appropriately to my personality. That reflects my life experience in this vehicle, this temple I inhabit for this life's journey. So, when I contrast myself with the writer of the article, it is not black and white thinking. We all have a personal sense of self, a personality, an individual body, and thoughts and emotions that go along with that. Also, in terms of learning any lessons, and building any character in this lifetime, I am all I have! All of that, that I described above. However, I tend to experience life and myself as a wholeness, more graceful, more expansive, stronger in the face of any obstacle, and perhaps that is simply the wisdom of being older. So, I certainly exist, but enjoyably often don't care to make a big distinction between me locally, and me, um, un-locally. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: So, *you* don't exist? àI have the hardest time with this concept. à*Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... àHer: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... ÃâàI personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
One saying that I think encapsulates all that I said about my identity, although it is interesting and practical to me in many ways, is that all those words and concepts, plus five bucks, will buy me a cup of coffee! Speaking of which, I recently discovered a Sumatran Mandheling, Light French Roast. Low acid, and very smooth. Like an earthy Kona. Very very good! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: For most practical purposes, YES, absolutely!!! Thanks for following all of this...identity spaghetti.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: So, the essence of *you* does exist, but you experience *you* as housed, for all practical purposes on this planet within a body (vehicle), but the *you* (the personal consciousness and attendant personality characteristics of you) is a fluid aspect of a larger un-local (what is un-local?) objective consciousness? or energy field?  Following the idea of you/your personal energy or self -  extending expansively beyond your physical body (and I'm not arguing the validity of this concept), are you not still actually *you* and yes, distinguished, from however you are defining the un-local? From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:17 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...  I am not surprised - I always challenge it, too. It is a matter of core identity. I exist less locally, or perhaps more subtly, than I used to, although I have undying reverence for the vehicle I currently inhabit. I also act appropriately to my personality. That reflects my life experience in this vehicle, this temple I inhabit for this life's journey. So, when I contrast myself with the writer of the article, it is not black and white thinking. We all have a personal sense of self, a personality, an individual body, and thoughts and emotions that go along with that. Also, in terms of learning any lessons, and building any character in this lifetime, I am all I have! All of that, that I described above. However, I tend to experience life and myself as a wholeness, more graceful, more expansive, stronger in the face of any obstacle, and perhaps that is simply the wisdom of being older. So, I certainly exist, but enjoyably often don't care to make a big distinction between me locally, and me, um, un-locally. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: So, *you* don't exist? àI have the hardest time with this concept. à*Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... àHer: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... ÃâàI personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the
Re: [FairfieldLife] Knowing where you'll be in the future
What is you don't have a predictable routine? Some of us don't. On 07/16/2013 09:41 AM, Emily Reyn wrote: This is common sense, based on people that have predictable routines - job, kids, grocery story, workout schedule, etc. What a waste of time. From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:27 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Knowing where you'll be in the future Not astrology but science. :-D http://www.fastcompany.com/3014307/leadership-now/do-you-know-where-youll-be-285-days-from-now-at-2-pm-these-data-masters-do Guess that won't make the free willers happy.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
Sounds like it was well roasted. From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... One saying that I think encapsulates all that I said about my identity, although it is interesting and practical to me in many ways, is that all those words and concepts, plus five bucks, will buy me a cup of coffee! Speaking of which, I recently discovered a Sumatran Mandheling, Light French Roast. Low acid, and very smooth. Like an earthy Kona. Very very good! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: For most practical purposes, YES, absolutely!!! Thanks for following all of this...identity spaghetti.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: So, the essence of *you* does exist, but you experience *you* as housed, for all practical purposes on this planet within a body (vehicle), but the *you* (the personal consciousness and attendant personality characteristics of you) is a fluid aspect of a larger un-local (what is un-local?) objective consciousness? or energy field?  Following the idea of you/your personal energy or self -  extending expansively beyond your physical body (and I'm not arguing the validity of this concept), are you not still actually *you* and yes, distinguished, from however you are defining the un-local? From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:17 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...  I am not surprised - I always challenge it, too. It is a matter of core identity. I exist less locally, or perhaps more subtly, than I used to, although I have undying reverence for the vehicle I currently inhabit. I also act appropriately to my personality. That reflects my life experience in this vehicle, this temple I inhabit for this life's journey. So, when I contrast myself with the writer of the article, it is not black and white thinking. We all have a personal sense of self, a personality, an individual body, and thoughts and emotions that go along with that. Also, in terms of learning any lessons, and building any character in this lifetime, I am all I have! All of that, that I described above. However, I tend to experience life and myself as a wholeness, more graceful, more expansive, stronger in the face of any obstacle, and perhaps that is simply the wisdom of being older. So, I certainly exist, but enjoyably often don't care to make a big distinction between me locally, and me, um, un-locally. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: So, *you* don't exist?  I have the hardest time with this concept.  *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...  Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...  I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based
Re: [FairfieldLife] Knowing where you'll be in the future
Yes, I do now - I operate within about a 500 mile radius, but who knows 285 days from now? From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:13 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Knowing where you'll be in the future What is you don't have a predictable routine? Some of us don't. On 07/16/2013 09:41 AM, Emily Reyn wrote: This is common sense, based on people that have predictable routines - job, kids, grocery story, workout schedule, etc. What a waste of time. From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:27 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Knowing where you'll be in the future Not astrology but science. :-D http://www.fastcompany.com/3014307/leadership-now/do-you-know-where-youll-be-285-days-from-now-at-2-pm-these-data-masters-do Guess that won't make the free willers happy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Knowing where you'll be in the future
Everyone is a creature of habit. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: Not astrology but science. :-D http://www.fastcompany.com/3014307/leadership-now/do-you-know-where-youll-be-285-days-from-now-at-2-pm-these-data-masters-do Guess that won't make the free willers happy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
Emily Reyn: So, *you* don't exist? I have the hardest time with this concept. Â *Who* posted what you posted? The past is gone, the future is not here yet; and the now passes in an instant, before you even know it. So, we are not 'existing' - we are point-instants in a spectrum of consciousness, continuum. Time is an illusion. In physics a body at rest tends to stay at rest; a body in motion tends to stay in motion. Quantum mechanics is a branch of physics that suggests that there are two facts about the universe: 1. The universe is non-deterministic. Non-determinism of quantum systems follows directly from the 'Schrödinger Equation'. 2. The concept of an objective measurement is meaningless. Objective measurement pertains to the 'Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle'. Shrodinger's Cat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat
[FairfieldLife] Ordering for the whole company
I liked this article on Wired today not because of the article itself but the picture of SNL's Bill Hader with a stack of drinks from Starbucks to take back to the office. I'm sure it was inspired by going to a Starbucks, finding one or two people in front of you in line and thinking whew, this will go fast. And then one of them pulls out a long list of drinks because they are ordering for the WHOLE company. Well there goes your quick coffee break. This happened once again last week when I had two people in front of me and the woman at the register pulls out a long list. Oh great. Funnier yet and kinda payback was when she asked for a couple of those drink holders they told her they were out but could find her a box to carry them back in. This particular Starbucks has managers I guess who can't predict what they're going to need in advance and fail to order in time. I often feel like saying to someone ordering for the whole company to tell them to get their own fucking drinks. At least I'd know how long the line and wait is actually going to be if they got them themselves. :-D http://www.wired.com/underwire/2013/07/how-to-cheat/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
Re: time is an illusion (and other things): http://www.wisdomsdoor.com/rc4/hrc4-38.shtml From: Richard J. Williams rich...@rwilliams.us To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:44 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Emily Reyn: So, *you* don't exist? I have the hardest time with this concept. Â *Who* posted what you posted? The past is gone, the future is not here yet; and the now passes in an instant, before you even know it. So, we are not 'existing' - we are point-instants in a spectrum of consciousness, continuum. Time is an illusion. In physics a body at rest tends to stay at rest; a body in motion tends to stay in motion. Quantum mechanics is a branch of physics that suggests that there are two facts about the universe: 1. The universe is non-deterministic. Non-determinism of quantum systems follows directly from the 'Schrödinger Equation'. 2. The concept of an objective measurement is meaningless. Objective measurement pertains to the 'Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle'. Shrodinger's Cat
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
This is the crux of what enlightenment is about. Those who are experiencing it don't experience localized awareness unless it is demanded (like a bill or tax collector comes knocking). The experience is like you don't exist. On 07/16/2013 10:17 AM, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: So, *you* don't exist? I have the hardest time with this concept. *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-\ reality-stupid/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
But noozguru, who is having the experience of I don't exist?! Anyway, I wonder where that coffee toting guy will be in 285 days. And why not one year? Why 285 days? Great article, btw, thanks. What stage of life are beej mantras good for? Did the girls from the Playboy mansion have sexy palms? I agree that Western med is FOR trauma. But big pharma doesn't want us to realize that. Ever. PS I was joking about the Nokia job (-: From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 1:59 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... This is the crux of what enlightenment is about. Those who are experiencing it don't experience localized awareness unless it is demanded (like a bill or tax collector comes knocking). The experience is like you don't exist. Recent Activity: Visit Your Group To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback .
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
The term enlightenment is found under most paradigms - with an attempt to use words/concepts to define and communicate it (limited in that way) that reflect said paradigm. Localized or un-localized are defined a certain way as well to you personally - they translate in a pretty meaningless fashion to me, for example. The word you and exist are also subject to your personal understanding or definition. It simply depends on which paradigm you operate under or which one rings most truthfully to you. From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:59 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... This is the crux of what enlightenment is about. Those who are experiencing it don't experience localized awareness unless it is demanded (like a bill or tax collector comes knocking). The experience is like you don't exist. On 07/16/2013 10:17 AM, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: So, *you* don't exist? I have the hardest time with this concept. *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-\ reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
I spent part of my morning reformatting an exchange with Emily we had more than a week ago, were I to attempt an answer. This post by turq and the responses do fit in with the response I was considering. I think that posted article was sort of in the right direction. Responses to this kind of thing, to me, relate to how a person experiences what we call 'self'. If one engages with a spiritual path or paths, this 'self', both conceptually and experientially undergoes modification, it changes. What we consider ourselves to be, fluctuates. What Dr Dumbass describes is one way of looking at the sense of self, but I find his utter rejection of what the lady wrote in that article somewhat curious, for to me they are in the same ballpark, just described in very different ways. For me the crux of this descriptive problem seems to revolve around the question 'How embodied is your sense of self?' What is it, where is it, and how much territory does it include. A secondary question is what is the relationship of thought to sense of self, and if all this has anything to do with reality, what is the relationship of thought to reality? I am using the word 'sense of self' because it leaves open the question as to whether there really is a self at all. Emily has asked more than once questions of the form '*Who* posted what you posted?' This seems to imply there is a self. So Emily, what is the *Who* that is 'Emily' like? What do you find when you look for it? What are its characteristics? What does it do? Now my experience of this is that it is empty, it is just a void, nothing is really there. There are processes, feeling, thoughts, going on, and they conveniently go under the name 'Xeno' but that is not what they are. It is more like you have a basket. The basket contains apples, oranges, bananas, maybe a coconut. It is convenient to call it a 'basket of fruit', but that does not mean there is an entity, a soul, or anything, that is 'a basket of fruit' intrinsically. It is just a label for a certain arrangement of stuff. Now Dr Dumbass seems to experience the sense of self rather delocalised, but I think he needs to describe it further, difficult though it may be to do so. For example, he wrote: Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. I do not see, just based on the words immediately above, that she is talking about a self. Just there is stuff going on in the body, and stuff going on outside the body. The full article does imply she is thinking of self, but I can see the above as functioning without a self. That is called bundle theory. Buddha and the Scottish philosopher David Hume seem to be proponents of this way of looking at self: Hume asks us to consider what impression gives us our concept of self. We tend to think of ourselves as selves stable entities that exist over time. But no matter how closely we examine our own experiences, we never observe anything beyond a series of transient feelings, sensations, and impressions. We cannot observe ourselves, or what we are, in a unified way. There is no impression of the self that ties our particular impressions together. In other words, we can never be directly aware of ourselves, only of what we are experiencing at any given moment. Although the relations between our ideas, feelings, and so on, may be traced through time by memory, there is no real evidence of any core that connects them. This argument also applies to the concept of the soul. Hume suggests that the self is just a bundle of perceptions, like links in a chain. To look for a unifying self beyond those perceptions is like looking for a chain apart from the links that constitute it. Hume argues that our concept of the self is a result of our natural habit of attributing unified existence to any collection of associated parts. This belief is natural, but there is no logical support for it. What is ambiguous for me here are Dr Dumbass's postulates. If the stuff moving around in the silence is external reality, how can it be external if it is 'in' the silence. This needs clarification. For me there is no real sense that silence is internal or external. All the stuff going on in the mind, and the stuff the body sees hears etc., outside the body, are very much the same stuff. As for thoughts about all this, my question is how much is one's experience is locked into what these thought delineate. Example: if there is such a thing as reality, why in the case of the Martin Zimmerman trial, are viewpoints so incredibly polarised? Two bodies met, scuffled, and one died from a gunshot. Those seem to be the common elements of all the stories that
Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]
And yet here you are Judy, wasting one of your few remaining posts to reply to alleged gibberish?! Go figure! IOW, methinks the lady doth protest too much (-: From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:06 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] Does anybody have *any* idea what the loon's problem is? Both of her posts have been complete gibberish. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Emily, excerpted from Judy's post to which I was referring: Whatever he may have said or not said to you in private weeks ago...There is no basis for you to demand behind-the-scenes negotiations. So your use of *dishonest place* doesn't make sense to me! From: Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:42 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] snip  Also, Share, nothing you said here makes any sense at all.  Just an observation for you.  Every time you sink into some kind of revenge post - it backfires on you because you can't think clearly from a dishonest place.   On Jul 15, 2013, at 7:13 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote:  Ravi and Doc, yep funny how Judy and others referred to Robin's emails to me as private whereas when she referred to my alleged demands for such, she used the term behind the scenes. So, Robin sends private emails to Share but Share *demands* emails that are *behind the scenes* Go figure! Here's an editorial exercise exploring connotations by reversing Judy's wordings: Last month Robin emailed Share *behind the scenes.* AND Share has demanded that the upsets between her and Robin be discussed via private emails. Private and demanded being Judy's word choices. Share says: I have requested that Robin and I discuss our upsets via direct, offline emails. From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 9:56 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]  Barry attempted to email me privately, too - And from Ravi joking about turq: - sorry for emailing you privately man. I apologize for making up outrageous lies about you, but I am the official spokesman for The Liars Inc, so hope you understand. Truth be told I have a huge crush on you and I so want to be like you. So please feel free to write to me on FFL anytime.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
Perfect - Thanks! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: This is the crux of what enlightenment is about. Those who are experiencing it don't experience localized awareness unless it is demanded (like a bill or tax collector comes knocking). The experience is like you don't exist. On 07/16/2013 10:17 AM, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: So, *you* don't exist? I have the hardest time with this concept. *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-\ reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
Yes, that is true, and conforms to my experience as well. As my consciousness changes, so does my identity, and continues to. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: The term enlightenment is found under most paradigms - with an attempt to use words/concepts to define and communicate it (limited in that way) that reflect said paradigm. Â Localized or un-localized are defined a certain way as well to you personally - they translate in a pretty meaningless fashion to me, for example. Â The word you and exist are also subject to your personal understanding or definition. Â It simply depends on which paradigm you operate under or which one rings most truthfully to you. Â From: Bhairitu noozguru@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:59 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Â This is the crux of what enlightenment is about. Those who are experiencing it don't experience localized awareness unless it is demanded (like a bill or tax collector comes knocking). The experience is like you don't exist. On 07/16/2013 10:17 AM, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: So, *you* don't exist? I have the hardest time with this concept. *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-\ reality-stupid/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Tyrannosaurus Was Active Predator!
salyavin, this is definitely one of those situations in which truth is way cooler than fiction. Thanks for posting. It amazes me how they could figure out the ages of the 2 critters. PS Do you really not like any of what alternative medicine has to offer?! From: salyavin808 fintlewoodle...@mail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 2:49 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Tyrannosaurus Was Active Predator! I'm sure you'll all be as relieved to hear this as I was. They are just so much *cooler* that way.. T rex tooth found embedded in prey, restoring dinosaur's reputation Tooth lodged in plant-eating dinosaur's spine proves that T rex wasn't just a scavenger but also hunted live prey New evidence suggests T rex was capable of bringing down live prey rather than simply scavenging dinosaur carcasses. Photograph: Corey Ford/Corbis Threats to the fearsome reputation of Tyrannosaurus rex appeared to have been seen off on Monday by fresh evidence unearthed in the US. The dinosaur's feeding habits have long been debated by academics, with some claiming that T rex was less a ferocious hunter and more a lumbering slowcoach that scavenged the carcasses of beasts that had died at the claws of others. The latest evidence comes from palaeontologists who found remnants of a prehistoric skirmish in a slab of rock at the Hell Creek Formation in South Dakota. The clash, which occurred around 66m years ago, involved a T rexand a large, plant-eating hadrosaur, and ended with the tooth of the former lodged firmly in the spine of the latter. Scans of the tooth and two surrounding tail vertebrae showed clear signs of bone healing around the wound, taken as proof that the hadrosaur was alive at the time of the attack and survived for several months or even years afterwards. This is unambiguous evidence that T rex was an active predator, the authors write in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Such evidence is rare in the fossil record for good reason – prey rarely escapes. Tyrannosaurs shed their teeth frequently as fresh sets came through. In this case a weaker rear tooth broke free as the T rex, which was not fully-grown, chomped on the hadrosaur's tail. The hadrosaur is believed to have been an adult Edmontosaur, which grew to around 10 metres in length.The tooth crown is embedded between two hadrosaur vertebrae and the bone has healed over. Photograph: David A Burnham We not only have a broken-off tooth embedded in the bone of another animal, but the bone has healed over the wound, and a nasty wound it was too, said David Burnham at Palm Beach Museum of Natural History in Florida. The remains join a large collection of fossils that tell their own partial stories about the dining habits of T rex. Previous discoveries reveal rake, puncture and chew marks on bones, while one specimen – an impressive half-metre of fossilised faeces – contained partly digested dinosaur bones. In all of these cases, it is hard to differentiate between predation and scavenging. Palaeontologists expressed mixed reactions to the latest findings. Jack Horner at the Museum of the Rockies in Montana, who served as technical adviser on the Jurassic Park movies, said: This one piece of evidence does seem to suggest that a tyrannosaur bit a hadrosaur, but certainly doesn't provide any indication of the sort of carnivore the rex actually was. In 2011 Horner and his team reported that T rex was probably an opportunistic carnivore like hyena, which take carrion and occasional live prey. This paper certainly offers no evidence to refute that hypothesis, Horner added. Paul Barrett, a dinosaur researcher at the Natural History Museum in London, expressed exasperation that the debate was still ongoing. The whole T rexscavenger or predator debate is pretty intractable and not particularly enlightening. Work on living carnivores, like big cats and wolves, clearly show they use both strategies depending on what's available to them. They'll generally make do with a meal from either source if it satisfies their dietary needs. Any other extinct carnivore, including T rex, is likely to have been the same, he said. This paper shows without question that a T rex bit a living hadrosaur, but it can't show if this was a regular behaviour or not, or even if this was hunting behaviour rather than some other kind of interaction, he added. But Sam Turvey, a senior research fellow at the Institute of Zoology in London, called it important and convincing new evidence. Even though T rex may have fed on carcasses when the opportunity arose – a behaviour also seen in modern-day carnivorous large mammals such as lions – the new findings provide strong evidence that these iconic dinosaurs were fully capable of being active predators, and help to dismiss the ecologically unrealistic hypothesis that they were restricted to a scavenging
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
It will make more sense to you once you've started down the path. On 07/16/2013 12:32 PM, Emily Reyn wrote: The term enlightenment is found under most paradigms - with an attempt to use words/concepts to define and communicate it (limited in that way) that reflect said paradigm. Localized or un-localized are defined a certain way as well to you personally - they translate in a pretty meaningless fashion to me, for example. The word you and exist are also subject to your personal understanding or definition. It simply depends on which paradigm you operate under or which one rings most truthfully to you. From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:59 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... This is the crux of what enlightenment is about. Those who are experiencing it don't experience localized awareness unless it is demanded (like a bill or tax collector comes knocking). The experience is like you don't exist. On 07/16/2013 10:17 AM, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: So, *you* don't exist? I have the hardest time with this concept. *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-\ reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Nelson Mandela, his energy
The day Tiger Woods met Nelson Mandela By Jay Hart | Devil Ball Golf http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/golf-devil-ball-golf/ - 3 hours ago http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/PZUT1lrBeAuJ6FQXegTK4g--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7c T04NQ--/http:/mit.zenfs.com/213/2013/07/tiger-nelson.jpg Tiger Woods met Nelson Mandela at his home in 1998. (Getty Images)GULLANE, Scotland - What does a Masters win at age 21 get you? For Tiger Woods http://sports.yahoo.com/golf/pga/players/Tiger+Woods/147 , it made for a private lunch with Nelson Mandela. On the eve of Mandela's 95th birthday, Woods described the first time he met the former South African president back in 1998. It still gives me chills to this day, Woods explained. A gentleman asked us to go into this side room over here and [said] 'President Mandela will join you in a bit.' And we walked in the room and my dad I were just looking around. And I said, 'Dad, do you feel it?' And he says, 'Yeah, it feels different in this room.' And it was just like a different energy in the room. We just looked at each other and just shrugged our shoulders. Maybe, I'm guessing 30 seconds later, I heard some movement behind me and it was President Mandela folding up the paper. And it was pretty amazing. The energy that he has, that he exudes, is unlike any person I've ever met. . That's an experience that I will never, ever forget. Mandela, who turns 95 on Thursday, remains in a South African hospital where he's been for five weeks battling a lung infection. He is reportedly in critical but stable condition.
[FairfieldLife] Article from RealClearPolitics
Mike Dixon (mdixon.6...@yahoo.com) wanted to share the following link with you: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/07/15/jeantel_i_told_trayvon_zimmerman_might_have_been_a_rapist.html They added this message: Trayvon not racist but Homophobic biggot
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
On 07/16/2013 12:25 PM, Share Long wrote: But noozguru, who is having the experience of I don't exist?! It's an experience. It's not that you don't exist. Intellectualizing over enlightenment is a favorite sport on FFL and not worth much of anything. MMY should have just said there is ignorance and moksha and left it at that. Anyway, I wonder where that coffee toting guy will be in 285 days. And why not one year? Why 285 days? Great article, btw, thanks. What stage of life are beej mantras good for? All. Did the girls from the Playboy mansion have sexy palms? Yup. But I had to tell them I did astrology and not really palmistry though I had studied it. One of my co-workers had told them I was an astrologer. He didn't say palmist. The next week other guys who were at the party asked me if I could teach them astrology because of the side benefits. The party was interesting because it was hosted by a Canadian company that make controllers for game consoles. It was hosted at the Century Plaza penthouse in Hollywood. This was during the 1996 E3 held in Los Angeles. E3 is an entertainment hardware and software show that is held yearly. The Playboy mansion ran the bar and Wolfgang Puck catered. I agree that Western med is FOR trauma. But big pharma doesn't want us to realize that. Ever. It's all about money. The lame thing about that video is that anyone who practices homeopathy would send a trauma case to the hospital for trauma care. That videos is a great laugh to people in the alternative care field. PS I was joking about the Nokia job (-: From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 1:59 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... This is the crux of what enlightenment is about. Those who are experiencing it don't experience localized awareness unless it is demanded (like a bill or tax collector comes knocking). The experience is like you don't exist. Recent Activity: Visit Your Group To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback .
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
It just fucks with your head, otherwise. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: It will make more sense to you once you've started down the path. On 07/16/2013 12:32 PM, Emily Reyn wrote: The term enlightenment is found under most paradigms - with an attempt to use words/concepts to define and communicate it (limited in that way) that reflect said paradigm. Localized or un-localized are defined a certain way as well to you personally - they translate in a pretty meaningless fashion to me, for example. The word you and exist are also subject to your personal understanding or definition. It simply depends on which paradigm you operate under or which one rings most truthfully to you. From: Bhairitu noozguru@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:59 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... This is the crux of what enlightenment is about. Those who are experiencing it don't experience localized awareness unless it is demanded (like a bill or tax collector comes knocking). The experience is like you don't exist. On 07/16/2013 10:17 AM, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: So, *you* don't exist? I have the hardest time with this concept. *Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... Her: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... I personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts. Most people have a non-stop mind, like yours. It is the spinning and looping of energy that creates most of the resonance in a non-stop mind. This then leads to their reality, WHETHER THAT IS THEIR INTENTION, OR NOT. The issue she is talking about is owning certain thoughts and intentions, and subconsciously disavowing others. But she is clueless enough about her inner state of mind, resulting in this ego-based drivel. More excellent evidence that you don't know yourself very well, if you agreed with this half-baked article. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: A friend posted this to another forum. I do not know the author or even of her, but I thought much of it was a breath of fresh air in the often stale cyber- chatrooms of New Age thought. Let's see what people here think of it: http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/07/your-thoughts-do-not-create-your-\ reality-stupid/
[FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...
Could be - I am going by what the coffee store person said, and the description on the bin. I also drank it a lot with arf n' arf and maple syrple, so I may be wy off on the actual body of the beans. It was damned good, whatever it was! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: Sounds like it was well roasted.  From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...  One saying that I think encapsulates all that I said about my identity, although it is interesting and practical to me in many ways, is that all those words and concepts, plus five bucks, will buy me a cup of coffee! Speaking of which, I recently discovered a Sumatran Mandheling, Light French Roast. Low acid, and very smooth. Like an earthy Kona. Very very good! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: For most practical purposes, YES, absolutely!!! Thanks for following all of this...identity spaghetti.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: So, the essence of *you* does exist, but you experience *you* as housed, for all practical purposes on this planet within a body (vehicle), but the *you* (the personal consciousness and attendant personality characteristics of you) is a fluid aspect of a larger un-local (what is un-local?) objective consciousness? or energy field? àFollowing the idea of you/your personal energy or self - àextending expansively beyond your physical body (and I'm not arguing the validity of this concept), are you not still actually *you* and yes, distinguished, from however you are defining the un-local? From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:17 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... àI am not surprised - I always challenge it, too. It is a matter of core identity. I exist less locally, or perhaps more subtly, than I used to, although I have undying reverence for the vehicle I currently inhabit. I also act appropriately to my personality. That reflects my life experience in this vehicle, this temple I inhabit for this life's journey. So, when I contrast myself with the writer of the article, it is not black and white thinking. We all have a personal sense of self, a personality, an individual body, and thoughts and emotions that go along with that. Also, in terms of learning any lessons, and building any character in this lifetime, I am all I have! All of that, that I described above. However, I tend to experience life and myself as a wholeness, more graceful, more expansive, stronger in the face of any obstacle, and perhaps that is simply the wisdom of being older. So, I certainly exist, but enjoyably often don't care to make a big distinction between me locally, and me, um, un-locally. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: So, *you* don't exist? ÃâàI have the hardest time with this concept. Ãâà*Who* posted what you posted? From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... ÃâàHer: Beliefs (b) + Thoughts (t) + feelings (f) = Internal Reality (IR) Circumstances (c) + people (p) = External Reality (ER) Me: Silence = (Internal) Reality All the stuff moving around in the silence = (External) Reality That's the difference. She is still operating on the assumption that *she* primarily exists. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I think she addresses both of these issues when she writes about noticing thoughts and feelings rather than trying to change them, get rid of them, etc. I think in the Buddhist tradition noticing is a way of quieting the mind. And she doesn't say to only notice one kind of thought or feeling. I don't see how you and she disagree. From: doctordumbass@ doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I create my reality Yeah, right... ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàI personally think she is full of it. *Of course* our thoughts create our reality. Not just the positive, affirmative ones, but all of the thoughts.
[FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: And yet here you are Judy, wasting one of your few remaining posts to reply to alleged gibberish?! Go figure! IOW, methinks the lady doth protest too much (-: Translation: Oh, shit, I screwed up *again*! She mustnot have meant whatever it was I thought she meant--*I*can't even figure out what I had in mind now, but I wassure it was going to just SMITE the bitch and I wasgoing to *win* one for once to show my pastoral counselor.Well, I'll just have to try to brazen it out as I usuallydo when I foul up, although sometimes I have the scaryfeeling that maybe I'm not all that convincing. No, no,I can't think about that or I'll go crazy...I can't bearthat much reality. Somebody, HELP MEEE!! From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:06 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] Does anybody have *any* idea what the loon's problem is? Both of her posts have been complete gibberish. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Emily, excerpted from Judy's post to which I was referring: Whatever he may have said or not said to you in private weeks ago...There is no basis for you to demand behind-the-scenes negotiations. So your use of *dishonest place* doesn't make sense to me! From: Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:42 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] snip Also, Share, nothing you said here makes any sense at all. ÃÂ Just an observation for you. ÃÂ Every time you sink into some kind of revenge post - it backfires on you because you can't think clearly from a dishonest place. ÃÂ ÃÂ On Jul 15, 2013, at 7:13 AM, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Ravi and Doc, yep funny how Judy and others referred to Robin's emails to me as private whereas when she referred to my alleged demands for such, she used the term behind the scenes. So, Robin sends private emails to Share but Share *demands* emails that are *behind the scenes* Go figure! Here's an editorial exercise exploring connotations by reversing Judy's wordings: Last month Robin emailed Share *behind the scenes.* AND Share has demanded that the upsets between her and Robin be discussed via private emails. Private and demanded being Judy's word choices. Share says: I have requested that Robin and I discuss our upsets via direct, offline emails.
[FairfieldLife] Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*, a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense. In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]
tee hee, turq I think I've found Gru's mother right here on FFL! From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: And yet here you are Judy, wasting one of your few remaining posts to reply to alleged gibberish?! Go figure! IOW, methinks the lady doth protest too much (-: Translation: Oh, shit, I screwed up *again*! She must not have meant whatever it was I thought she meant--*I* can't even figure out what I had in mind now, but I was sure it was going to just SMITE the bitch and I was going to *win* one for once to show my pastoral counselor. Well, I'll just have to try to brazen it out as I usually do when I foul up, although sometimes I have the scary feeling that maybe I'm not all that convincing. No, no, I can't think about that or I'll go crazy...I can't bear that much reality. Somebody, HELP MEEE!! From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:06 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] Does anybody have *any* idea what the loon's problem is? Both of her posts have been complete gibberish. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Emily, excerpted from Judy's post to which I was referring: Whatever he may have said or not said to you in private weeks ago...There is no basis for you to demand behind-the-scenes negotiations. So your use of *dishonest place* doesn't make sense to me! From: Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:42 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] snip Also, Share, nothing you said here makes any sense at all.  Just an observation for you.  Every time you sink into some kind of revenge post - it backfires on you because you can't think clearly from a dishonest place.   On Jul 15, 2013, at 7:13 AM, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Ravi and Doc, yep funny how Judy and others referred to Robin's emails to me as private whereas when she referred to my alleged demands for such, she used the term behind the scenes. So, Robin sends private emails to Share but Share *demands* emails that are *behind the scenes* Go figure! Here's an editorial exercise exploring connotations by reversing Judy's wordings: Last month Robin emailed Share *behind the scenes.* AND Share has demanded that the upsets between her and Robin be discussed via private emails. Private and demanded being Judy's word choices. Share says: I have requested that Robin and I discuss our upsets via direct, offline emails.
[FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: tee hee, turq I think I've found Gru's mother right here on FFL! And you're still here, Share. Reality isn't going away. From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: And yet here you are Judy, wasting one of your few remaining posts to reply to alleged gibberish?! Go figure! IOW, methinks the lady doth protest too much (-: Translation: Oh, shit, I screwed up *again*! She must not have meant whatever it was I thought she meant--*I* can't even figure out what I had in mind now, but I was sure it was going to just SMITE the bitch and I was going to *win* one for once to show my pastoral counselor. Well, I'll just have to try to brazen it out as I usually do when I foul up, although sometimes I have the scary feeling that maybe I'm not all that convincing. No, no, I can't think about that or I'll go crazy...I can't bear that much reality. Somebody, HELP MEEE!! From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:06 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] Does anybody have *any* idea what the loon's problem is? Both of her posts have been complete gibberish. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Emily, excerpted from Judy's post to which I was referring: Whatever he may have said or not said to you in private weeks ago...There is no basis for you to demand behind-the-scenes negotiations. So your use of *dishonest place* doesn't make sense to me! From: Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:42 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] snip Also, Share, nothing you said here makes any sense at all. ÃâàJust an observation for you. ÃâàEvery time you sink into some kind of revenge post - it backfires on you because you can't think clearly from a dishonest place. ÃâàÃâàOn Jul 15, 2013, at 7:13 AM, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Ravi and Doc, yep funny how Judy and others referred to Robin's emails to me as private whereas when she referred to my alleged demands for such, she used the term behind the scenes. So, Robin sends private emails to Share but Share *demands* emails that are *behind the scenes* Go figure! Here's an editorial exercise exploring connotations by reversing Judy's wordings: Last month Robin emailed Share *behind the scenes.* AND Share has demanded that the upsets between her and Robin be discussed via private emails. Private and demanded being Judy's word choices. Share says: I have requested that Robin and I discuss our upsets via direct, offline emails.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*, a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense. In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him. There are a thousand of these stories happening all over the world. People seem riveted on this one in particular. You can argue the facts, the events, the testimony forever and never quite have the whole complexity of what truly happened. There are two many nuances of action and reaction and the intricacy of each human involved in this physical confrontation between two men for anyone on the outside to fully comprehend the ultimate truth(s) of this event. You can talk about every theory from homophobia to racism to indigestion as reasons behind this deadly encounter but you'd probably be wrong. Sometimes life remains a mystery and I feel it is best to emerge from exposure to these kinds of media frenzies free of bitterness and resentment as onlookers -which is what we all are.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
So Trayvon was worried Zimmerman was a gay rapist ass-craker? That's homophobia and gay profiling! Atlantic: http://tinyurl.com/lo5dn3n Mike Dixon: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*, a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense. In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
[FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: tee hee, turq I think I've found Gru's mother right here on FFL! What a fascinating study in human nature to find you aligned so nicely with Barry these days. Interesting bedfellows. From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: And yet here you are Judy, wasting one of your few remaining posts to reply to alleged gibberish?! Go figure! IOW, methinks the lady doth protest too much (-: Translation: Oh, shit, I screwed up *again*! She must not have meant whatever it was I thought she meant--*I* can't even figure out what I had in mind now, but I was sure it was going to just SMITE the bitch and I was going to *win* one for once to show my pastoral counselor. Well, I'll just have to try to brazen it out as I usually do when I foul up, although sometimes I have the scary feeling that maybe I'm not all that convincing. No, no, I can't think about that or I'll go crazy...I can't bear that much reality. Somebody, HELP MEEE!! From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:06 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] Does anybody have *any* idea what the loon's problem is? Both of her posts have been complete gibberish. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Emily, excerpted from Judy's post to which I was referring: Whatever he may have said or not said to you in private weeks ago...There is no basis for you to demand behind-the-scenes negotiations. So your use of *dishonest place* doesn't make sense to me! From: Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:42 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] snip Also, Share, nothing you said here makes any sense at all. ÃâàJust an observation for you. ÃâàEvery time you sink into some kind of revenge post - it backfires on you because you can't think clearly from a dishonest place. ÃâàÃâàOn Jul 15, 2013, at 7:13 AM, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Ravi and Doc, yep funny how Judy and others referred to Robin's emails to me as private whereas when she referred to my alleged demands for such, she used the term behind the scenes. So, Robin sends private emails to Share but Share *demands* emails that are *behind the scenes* Go figure! Here's an editorial exercise exploring connotations by reversing Judy's wordings: Last month Robin emailed Share *behind the scenes.* AND Share has demanded that the upsets between her and Robin be discussed via private emails. Private and demanded being Judy's word choices. Share says: I have requested that Robin and I discuss our upsets via direct, offline emails.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Maybe Trayvon thought that Zimmerman was an alien -- a creature from Mars or somewhere like that. It was Trayvon's irrational fear of extraterrestrial life that killed him. Zimmerman had nothing to do with it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*,�a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense.�In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Zimmerman defended his life from a person with an irrational fear of him. He had no other choice. From: feste37 fest...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 2:57 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot Maybe Trayvon thought that Zimmerman was an alien -- a creature from Mars or somewhere like that. It was Trayvon's irrational fear of extraterrestrial life that killed him. Zimmerman had nothing to do with it. --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*,�a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense.�In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Yes I think Mikey boy's right. Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans, epitomized by Travyon. How can one not feel the pain and burden of Whites with their long history of slavery when African American landowners shipped them from Europe, then being confined to housing projects with rampant guns, drugs, cheap wine, cheap meat - coupled with systematic racism denying them employment opportunities forcing a cycle of white-on-white violence, high crime rate, alcoholism and drug abuse. The burden of being constantly profiled, harassed and abused by the predominantly African-American police. God I myself spent 3 years around housing projecting witnessing the pain and burden of Whites. Who can ever forget a bunch of African Americans torturing, tying the young homosexual Mathew Shepard to a fence and leaving him to die. My sympathies are with Whites, Mikey boy and Zimmerman. On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com wrote: ** Zimmerman defended his life from a person with an irrational fear of him. He had no other choice. *From:* feste37 fest...@yahoo.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 16, 2013 2:57 PM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot ** Maybe Trayvon thought that Zimmerman was an alien -- a creature from Mars or somewhere like that. It was Trayvon's irrational fear of extraterrestrial life that killed him. Zimmerman had nothing to do with it. --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.comFairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*,�a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense.�In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How to improve TM practice - a heretic's guide
Thanks again. Re Beej mantras are commonly used in astrology and ayurveda . . . tells the person to repeat the mantra either in a short meditation or sometimes throughout the day (like a walking mantra). Repeating the mantra through the day (like the Hare Krishna crowd) is very different from effortless TM. The point is kinda to forget the mantra. Re: When longer mantras are given as a public first technique then the teacher usually gives shaktipat to jump-start them. Muktananda's organization teaches this way. But the guru has to wait until his teachers have developed enough shakti to give shakipat to teach these. I was also taught by my tantra guru to teach meditation this way. You sound like the guy I need to meet! What I've read about Muktananda's shaktipat trickery has always intrigued me - he was able to produce serious shifts in his students awareness - shifts that are difficult to explain. Do you think it comes down to hypnotic suggestion? - which is what charismatic church leaders seem to practise (perhaps unconsciously). Or do you reckon there's something more going on here? I was recently looking for a (basic, non-technical) book on shaktipat that might give me some insight: can you recommend any titles (maybe one of Muktananda's as I've not read any of his books)? Re . . . With a little zip from performing a puja before each teaching session. But a lot of people might have just picked the beej mantra up out of book and it would have worked after a while. Yes, there are some on-line TM-type instructors that have appeared recently. I remember from my own TM initiation that I felt the dive within right from the get-go. In fact, it took me completely by surprise. Those who've tried learning from a book or on-line do report benefits so I hope they're getting the same experiences but I wonder if, by missing out on that face-to-face encounter, something gets lost by the mediation of text or technology. Rather like Benson's Relaxation Response! One of the most striking things about Maharishi's decision to set-up his teacher-training assembly line was his confidence that they'd be able to transmit the TM technique and get guaranteed results. How could he be so confident when he was dealing with something so intangible? By the way, when I refer to hypnosis above, that's not a put-down as hypnosis is clearly beneficial in certain situations. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: Beej mantras are commonly used in astrology and ayurveda. They don't take much to work and the astrologer or ayurvedic practitioner just tells the person to repeat the mantra either in a short meditation or sometimes throughout the day (like a walking mantra).. Longer mantras like the advanced technique require more to work. When longer mantras are given as a public first technique then the teacher usually gives shaktipat to jumpstart them. Muktanda's organization teaches this way. But the guru has to wait until his teachers have developed enough shakti to give shakipat to teach these. I was also taught by my tantra guru to teach meditation this way. Maharishi wanted to create a lot of teachers so in a way went with the beej techniques ala astrology or ayurveda with a little zip from performing a puja before each teaching session. But a lot of people might have just picked the beej mantra up out of book and it would have worked after a while. Not so much so by taking a longer mantra out of a book. Certain beej mantras are considered useful for certain stages of life.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Cenk nails this issue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtcveaMUJSIlist=SPTpcK80irdQidhuTjXxQZNThuoGPeWjT0feature=player_detailpage --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*, a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense. In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Christ, get over yourself! Treat people as individuals not as representatives of a particular race or nation. Re Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans: you listen to any hip-hop music recently? Clearly some black individuals (notice I said some there?) can't abide gays. What --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Yes I think Mikey boy's right. Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans, epitomized by Travyon. How can one not feel the pain and burden of Whites with their long history of slavery when African American landowners shipped them from Europe, then being confined to housing projects with rampant guns, drugs, cheap wine, cheap meat - coupled with systematic racism denying them employment opportunities forcing a cycle of white-on-white violence, high crime rate, alcoholism and drug abuse. The burden of being constantly profiled, harassed and abused by the predominantly African-American police. God I myself spent 3 years around housing projecting witnessing the pain and burden of Whites. Who can ever forget a bunch of African Americans torturing, tying the young homosexual Mathew Shepard to a fence and leaving him to die. My sympathies are with Whites, Mikey boy and Zimmerman.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Priceless! I got that beat though. Here's a comment on another web site: I wonder if this whole thing wouldn't have just blown over if the victim wasn't the president's son. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: So Trayvon was worried Zimmerman was a gay rapist ass-craker? That's homophobia and gay profiling!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How to improve TM practice - a heretic's guide
On 07/16/2013 04:15 PM, Seraphita wrote: Thanks again. Re Beej mantras are commonly used in astrology and ayurveda . . . tells the person to repeat the mantra either in a short meditation or sometimes throughout the day (like a walking mantra). Repeating the mantra through the day (like the Hare Krishna crowd) is very different from effortless TM. The point is kinda to forget the mantra. There is the TM walking mantra for kids. And in TM the mantra is just a faint idea. FYI, I taught TM too. Re: When longer mantras are given as a public first technique then the teacher usually gives shaktipat to jump-start them. Muktananda's organization teaches this way. But the guru has to wait until his teachers have developed enough shakti to give shakipat to teach these. I was also taught by my tantra guru to teach meditation this way. You sound like the guy I need to meet! What I've read about Muktananda's shaktipat trickery has always intrigued me - he was able to produce serious shifts in his students awareness - shifts that are difficult to explain. Do you think it comes down to hypnotic suggestion? - which is what charismatic church leaders seem to practise (perhaps unconsciously). Or do you reckon there's something more going on here? It is the transference of energy or shakti. It isn't hypnosis. Tantrics are supposed to get so powerful and good at it that they can temporarily animate a dead corpse in a cremation ground. I was recently looking for a (basic, non-technical) book on shaktipat that might give me some insight: can you recommend any titles (maybe one of Muktananda's as I've not read any of his books)? It can't be learned from a book. It is really simple and there have been others on FFL who have taken some of the shaktipat courses that other Indian teachers have offered. My teacher limited me to giving it only 7 times per day when starting out. But he also only allowed me to do the technique after 5 years of instruction. Re . . . With a little zip from performing a puja before each teaching session. But a lot of people might have just picked the beej mantra up out of book and it would have worked after a while. Yes, there are some on-line TM-type instructors that have appeared recently. I remember from my own TM initiation that I felt the dive within right from the get-go. In fact, it took me completely by surprise. Those who've tried learning from a book or on-line do report benefits so I hope they're getting the same experiences but I wonder if, by missing out on that face-to-face encounter, something gets lost by the mediation of text or technology. Three years prior to learning TM I tried a meditation out of a book. I didn't expect anything but the kundalini rose to the crown chakra. It was as if I went up into the sun and coming out I was disoriented. I had been doing some yoga asanas that were taught to me by someone in the house where I was staying. Those probably helped prime me but OTOH I had spiritual experiences since childhood but nothing like the kundalini rising. So it depends. I also had a friend who was raised by Rosicrucians and was very spiritual. He got shaktipat and meditation instruction from one of Muktananda's teachers and said he didn't experience anything. Rather like Benson's Relaxation Response! One of the most striking things about Maharishi's decision to set-up his teacher-training assembly line was his confidence that they'd be able to transmit the TM technique and get guaranteed results. How could he be so confident when he was dealing with something so intangible? Because indeed it is a very simple technique. And as I mentioned something like astrologers or ayurvedic practitioners give in a less structured way. I had a professor of astrology at a Hindu university recommend the same mantra as the TM advanced technique after seeing my chart. By the way, when I refer to hypnosis above, that's not a put-down as hypnosis is clearly beneficial in certain situations. My tantric guru became a licensed hypno-therapist. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: Beej mantras are commonly used in astrology and ayurveda. They don't take much to work and the astrologer or ayurvedic practitioner just tells the person to repeat the mantra either in a short meditation or sometimes throughout the day (like a walking mantra).. Longer mantras like the advanced technique require more to work. When longer mantras are given as a public first technique then the teacher usually gives shaktipat to jumpstart them. Muktanda's organization teaches this way. But the guru has to wait until his teachers have developed enough shakti to give shakipat to teach these. I was also taught by my tantra guru to teach meditation this way. Maharishi wanted to create a lot of teachers so in a way went with the beej techniques ala astrology or ayurveda with a little zip from performing a puja
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Seraphita s3raph...@yahoo.com wrote: ** Christ, get over yourself! Treat people as individuals not as representatives of a particular race or nation. I can't Seraphita baby - how can you be so cold-hearted and not show any empathy to my pain, my bitterness, the sadness and the overwhelming resentment I feel against the deep rooted, deep seated, deep, deep, fucking deep bigotry of African Americans? You heartless bastard - I hate you - you hear me? I fucking HATE YOU @!#$%^*( Re Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans: you listen to any hip-hop music recently? Clearly some black individuals (notice I said some there?) can't abide gays. What --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Yes I think Mikey boy's right. Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans, epitomized by Travyon. How can one not feel the pain and burden of Whites with their long history of slavery when African American landowners shipped them from Europe, then being confined to housing projects with rampant guns, drugs, cheap wine, cheap meat - coupled with systematic racism denying them employment opportunities forcing a cycle of white-on-white violence, high crime rate, alcoholism and drug abuse. The burden of being constantly profiled, harassed and abused by the predominantly African-American police. God I myself spent 3 years around housing projecting witnessing the pain and burden of Whites. Who can ever forget a bunch of African Americans torturing, tying the young homosexual Mathew Shepard to a fence and leaving him to die. My sympathies are with Whites, Mikey boy and Zimmerman.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@... wrote: Christ, get over yourself! Treat people as individuals not as representatives of a particular race or nation. Re Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans: you listen to any hip-hop music recently? Clearly some black individuals (notice I said some there?) can't abide gays. What --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Yes I think Mikey boy's right. Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans, epitomized by Travyon. How can one not feel the pain and burden of Whites with their long history of slavery when African American landowners shipped them from Europe, then being confined to housing projects with rampant guns, drugs, cheap wine, cheap meat - coupled with systematic racism denying them employment opportunities forcing a cycle of white-on-white violence, high crime rate, alcoholism and drug abuse. The burden of being constantly profiled, harassed and abused by the predominantly African-American police. God I myself spent 3 years around housing projecting witnessing the pain and burden of Whites. Who can ever forget a bunch of African Americans torturing, tying the young homosexual Mathew Shepard to a fence and leaving him to die. My sympathies are with Whites, Mikey boy and Zimmerman.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How to improve TM practice - a heretic's guide
Thanks yet again. Taking on board what you say about shaktipat and book-learning, which of Muktananda's books would you recommend if I just wanted to learn about the man and his trajectory? And, with apologies for lowering the tone of the conversation, what did you make of the accusations of sexual impropriety against Mucky? As he seems to be guilty as charged (no?) does that invalidate what he had to teach? Also, do you know of any shaktipat groups in the UK that could be worth investigating? Does your group have centres (centers) over here? As regards your personal history, did you ever try psychedelics back in the day; I'm wondering if they might have been a cause of some of your experiences. (If you don't want to answer this bit, that's fine too!) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: On 07/16/2013 04:15 PM, Seraphita wrote: Thanks again. Re Beej mantras are commonly used in astrology and ayurveda . . . tells the person to repeat the mantra either in a short meditation or sometimes throughout the day (like a walking mantra). Repeating the mantra through the day (like the Hare Krishna crowd) is very different from effortless TM. The point is kinda to forget the mantra. There is the TM walking mantra for kids. And in TM the mantra is just a faint idea. FYI, I taught TM too. Re: When longer mantras are given as a public first technique then the teacher usually gives shaktipat to jump-start them. Muktananda's organization teaches this way. But the guru has to wait until his teachers have developed enough shakti to give shakipat to teach these. I was also taught by my tantra guru to teach meditation this way. You sound like the guy I need to meet! What I've read about Muktananda's shaktipat trickery has always intrigued me - he was able to produce serious shifts in his students awareness - shifts that are difficult to explain. Do you think it comes down to hypnotic suggestion? - which is what charismatic church leaders seem to practise (perhaps unconsciously). Or do you reckon there's something more going on here? It is the transference of energy or shakti. It isn't hypnosis. Tantrics are supposed to get so powerful and good at it that they can temporarily animate a dead corpse in a cremation ground. I was recently looking for a (basic, non-technical) book on shaktipat that might give me some insight: can you recommend any titles (maybe one of Muktananda's as I've not read any of his books)? It can't be learned from a book. It is really simple and there have been others on FFL who have taken some of the shaktipat courses that other Indian teachers have offered. My teacher limited me to giving it only 7 times per day when starting out. But he also only allowed me to do the technique after 5 years of instruction. Re . . . With a little zip from performing a puja before each teaching session. But a lot of people might have just picked the beej mantra up out of book and it would have worked after a while. Yes, there are some on-line TM-type instructors that have appeared recently. I remember from my own TM initiation that I felt the dive within right from the get-go. In fact, it took me completely by surprise. Those who've tried learning from a book or on-line do report benefits so I hope they're getting the same experiences but I wonder if, by missing out on that face-to-face encounter, something gets lost by the mediation of text or technology. Three years prior to learning TM I tried a meditation out of a book. I didn't expect anything but the kundalini rose to the crown chakra. It was as if I went up into the sun and coming out I was disoriented. I had been doing some yoga asanas that were taught to me by someone in the house where I was staying. Those probably helped prime me but OTOH I had spiritual experiences since childhood but nothing like the kundalini rising. So it depends. I also had a friend who was raised by Rosicrucians and was very spiritual. He got shaktipat and meditation instruction from one of Muktananda's teachers and said he didn't experience anything. Rather like Benson's Relaxation Response! One of the most striking things about Maharishi's decision to set-up his teacher-training assembly line was his confidence that they'd be able to transmit the TM technique and get guaranteed results. How could he be so confident when he was dealing with something so intangible? Because indeed it is a very simple technique. And as I mentioned something like astrologers or ayurvedic practitioners give in a less structured way. I had a professor of astrology at a Hindu university recommend the same mantra as the TM advanced technique after seeing my chart. By the way, when I refer to hypnosis above, that's not a put-down as hypnosis is clearly beneficial in certain situations. My tantric guru became a licensed hypno-therapist. --- In
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Excellent. That's a fair cop as we say over here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
That's instant karma for you. As the one who started the whole Zimmerman/Steyn argy-bargy thread, when I saw a new thread had been started on this topic I thought: Don't go there Seraphita. I ignored the voices in my head and look what happens! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Seraphita s3raphita@... wrote: ** Christ, get over yourself! Treat people as individuals not as representatives of a particular race or nation. I can't Seraphita baby - how can you be so cold-hearted and not show any empathy to my pain, my bitterness, the sadness and the overwhelming resentment I feel against the deep rooted, deep seated, deep, deep, fucking deep bigotry of African Americans? You heartless bastard - I hate you - you hear me? I fucking HATE YOU @!#$%^*( Re Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans: you listen to any hip-hop music recently? Clearly some black individuals (notice I said some there?) can't abide gays. What --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Yes I think Mikey boy's right. Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans, epitomized by Travyon. How can one not feel the pain and burden of Whites with their long history of slavery when African American landowners shipped them from Europe, then being confined to housing projects with rampant guns, drugs, cheap wine, cheap meat - coupled with systematic racism denying them employment opportunities forcing a cycle of white-on-white violence, high crime rate, alcoholism and drug abuse. The burden of being constantly profiled, harassed and abused by the predominantly African-American police. God I myself spent 3 years around housing projecting witnessing the pain and burden of Whites. Who can ever forget a bunch of African Americans torturing, tying the young homosexual Mathew Shepard to a fence and leaving him to die. My sympathies are with Whites, Mikey boy and Zimmerman.
[FairfieldLife] Post Count Wed 17-Jul-13 00:15:06 UTC
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): 07/13/13 00:00:00 End Date (UTC): 07/20/13 00:00:00 436 messages as of (UTC) 07/17/13 00:06:13 45 authfriend 34 doctordumbass 34 Seraphita 32 Ann 31 turquoiseb 29 Bhairitu 27 Share Long 27 Ravi Chivukula 23 Mike Dixon 22 Richard J. Williams 20 Michael Jackson 20 Emily Reyn 14 raunchydog 8 wgm4u 8 card 8 John 7 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 7 Buck 6 feste37 6 Susan 5 salyavin808 4 seventhray27 4 emilymae.reyn 3 nablusoss1008 2 emptybill 2 Rick Archer 2 Alex Stanley 1 sparaig 1 mjackson74 1 mdixon.6569 1 danfriedman2002 1 Duveyoung 1 Arhata Osho Posters: 33 Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times = Daylight Saving Time (Summer): US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM Standard Time (Winter): US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
By the way: I don't think Brits have a superiority in the recognition of irony. It's more that Yanks and Brits are attuned differently. The fact that I missed this one and you missed some of mine rather nicely makes my point. (Seizing victory from the jaws of defeat!) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita wrote: Excellent. That's a fair cop as we say over here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Thanks for being a good sport. I quite like the English, actually. But that cultural superiority thing is a bit outdated, don't you think? You may have Shakespeare, but we have, er . . . er . . . we have . . . OK, I'll get back to you on that one. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@... wrote: Excellent. That's a fair cop as we say over here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
The First Amendment and Jack Daniel's No 7. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Thanks for being a good sport. I quite like the English, actually. But that cultural superiority thing is a bit outdated, don't you think? You may have Shakespeare, but we have, er . . . er . . . we have . . . OK, I'll get back to you on that one. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@ wrote: Excellent. That's a fair cop as we say over here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: Thanks for being a good sport. I quite like the English, actually. But that cultural superiority thing is a bit outdated, don't you think? You may have Shakespeare, but we have, er . . . er . . . we have . . . OK, I'll get back to you on that one. Mark Twain. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@ wrote: Excellent. That's a fair cop as we say over here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic.
[FairfieldLife] The 23rd Psalm
As freely interpreted by the Strawbs. This is what church services should be like. http://tinyurl.com/nt8mjud But if at the Church they would give us some Ale. And a pleasant fire, our souls to regale; We'd sing and we'd pray, all the live-long day; Nor ever once wish from the Church to stray. William Blake
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Oh, if we're talking writers: Edgar Allan Poe - peerless. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: Thanks for being a good sport. I quite like the English, actually. But that cultural superiority thing is a bit outdated, don't you think? You may have Shakespeare, but we have, er . . . er . . . we have . . . OK, I'll get back to you on that one. Mark Twain. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita wrote: Excellent. That's a fair cop as we say over here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
an excellent piece of writing Ravi From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 6:47 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot Yes I think Mikey boy's right. Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans, epitomized by Travyon. How can one not feel the pain and burden of Whites with their long history of slavery when African American landowners shipped them from Europe, then being confined to housing projects with rampant guns, drugs, cheap wine, cheap meat - coupled with systematic racism denying them employment opportunities forcing a cycle of white-on-white violence, high crime rate, alcoholism and drug abuse. The burden of being constantly profiled, harassed and abused by the predominantly African-American police. God I myself spent 3 years around housing projecting witnessing the pain and burden of Whites. Who can ever forget a bunch of African Americans torturing, tying the young homosexual Mathew Shepard to a fence and leaving him to die. My sympathies are with Whites, Mikey boy and Zimmerman. On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com wrote: Zimmerman defended his life from a person with an irrational fear of him. He had no other choice. From: feste37 fest...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 2:57 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot Maybe Trayvon thought that Zimmerman was an alien -- a creature from Mars or somewhere like that. It was Trayvon's irrational fear of extraterrestrial life that killed him. Zimmerman had nothing to do with it. --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*,�a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense.�In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
This is excellent - his summation support my assertion that the local cops didn't give a damn about a black kid getting shot by someone not black. From: Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 7:26 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot Cenk nails this issue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtcveaMUJSIlist=SPTpcK80irdQidhuTjXxQZNThuoGPeWjT0feature=player_detailpage --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*, a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense. In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
I thought it was lead poisoning? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*, a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense. In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Yep, I like this. Common sense. Mike, you done gone off the deep end on this and you misspelled his name. Matthew Shepard was his name. You sound both racist and homophobic yourself. On the night of October 6–7, 1998, Shepard met Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson for the first time at the Fireside Lounge in Laramie, Wyoming.[7][8] It was decided that McKinney and Henderson would give Shepard a ride home.[9] McKinney and Henderson subsequently drove the car to a remote, rural area and proceeded to rob, pistol-whip, and torture Shepard, tying him to a fence and leaving him to die. According to their court testimony, McKinney and Henderson also discovered his address and intended to steal from his home. Still tied to the fence, Shepard, who was still alive but in a coma, was discovered 18 hours later by Aaron Kreifels, a cyclist who initially mistook Shepard for a scarecrow.[10] Shepard had suffered fractures to the back of his head and in front of his right ear. He experienced severe brainstem damage, which affected his body's ability to regulate heart rate, body temperature, and other vital functions. There were also about a dozen small lacerations around his head, face, and neck. His injuries were deemed too severe for doctors to operate. Shepard never regained consciousness and remained on full life support. While he lay in intensive care, candlelight vigils were held by the people of Laramie.[11] From: Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:26 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot Cenk nails this issue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtcveaMUJSIlist=SPTpcK80irdQidhuTjXxQZNThuoGPeWjT0feature=player_detailpage --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*, a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense. In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
I've always thought of Poe as a bit of a weirdo, actually, but we do have the peerless Whitman. Song of Myself is an astonishing poem, as astonishing to me now as it was over forty years ago when I first read it. There are not many poets who have written from the perspective of unity consciousness, but Whitman was one of them, and he did it in an absolutely original way. There is only one Walt. Here's part of it for anyone who might be interested and hasn't encountered it before. Is it not magnificent? from Song of Myself In all people I see myself, none more and not one a barley-corn less, And the good or bad I say of myself I say of them. I know I am solid and sound, To me the converging objects of the universe perpetually flow, All are written to me, and I must get what the writing means. I know I am deathless, I know this orbit of mine cannot be swept by a carpenter's compass, I know I shall not pass like a child's carlacue cut with a burnt stick at night. I know I am august, I do not trouble my spirit to vindicate itself or be understood, I see that the elementary laws never apologize, (I reckon I behave no prouder than the level I plant my house by, after all.) I exist as I am, that is enough, If no other in the world be aware I sit content, And if each and all be aware I sit content. One world is aware and by far the largest to me, and that is myself, And whether I come to my own to-day or in ten thousand or ten million years, I can cheerfully take it now, or with equal cheerfulness I can wait. My foothold is tenon'd and mortis'd in granite, I laugh at what you call dissolution, And I know the amplitude of time. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@... wrote: Oh, if we're talking writers: Edgar Allan Poe - peerless. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: Thanks for being a good sport. I quite like the English, actually. But that cultural superiority thing is a bit outdated, don't you think? You may have Shakespeare, but we have, er . . . er . . . we have . . . OK, I'll get back to you on that one. Mark Twain. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita wrote: Excellent. That's a fair cop as we say over here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
It *is* magnificent. (Yes, more from Wikipedia on his religious views - don't know if unity consciousness, unless it's more like that unity consciousness one feels in nature, was what he was feeling): Religion Whitman was deeply influenced by deism. He denied any one faith was more important than another, and embraced all religions equally.[118] In Song of Myself, he gave an inventory of major religions and indicated he respected and accepted all of them—a sentiment he further emphasized in his poem With Antecedents, affirming: I adopt each theory, myth, god, and demi-god, / I see that the old accounts, bibles, genealogies, are true, without exception.[118] In 1874, he was invited to write a poem about the Spiritualism movement, to which he responded, It seems to me nearly altogether a poor, cheap, crudehumbug.[119] Whitman was a religious skeptic: though he accepted all churches, he believed in none.[118] God, to Whitman, was both immanent andtranscendent and the human soul was immortal and in a state of progressive development.[120] From: feste37 fest...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 6:45 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot I've always thought of Poe as a bit of a weirdo, actually, but we do have the peerless Whitman. Song of Myself is an astonishing poem, as astonishing to me now as it was over forty years ago when I first read it. There are not many poets who have written from the perspective of unity consciousness, but Whitman was one of them, and he did it in an absolutely original way. There is only one Walt. Here's part of it for anyone who might be interested and hasn't encountered it before. Is it not magnificent? from Song of Myself In all people I see myself, none more and not one a barley-corn less, And the good or bad I say of myself I say of them. I know I am solid and sound, To me the converging objects of the universe perpetually flow, All are written to me, and I must get what the writing means. I know I am deathless, I know this orbit of mine cannot be swept by a carpenter's compass, I know I shall not pass like a child's carlacue cut with a burnt stick at night. I know I am august, I do not trouble my spirit to vindicate itself or be understood, I see that the elementary laws never apologize, (I reckon I behave no prouder than the level I plant my house by, after all.) I exist as I am, that is enough, If no other in the world be aware I sit content, And if each and all be aware I sit content. One world is aware and by far the largest to me, and that is myself, And whether I come to my own to-day or in ten thousand or ten million years, I can cheerfully take it now, or with equal cheerfulness I can wait. My foothold is tenon'd and mortis'd in granite, I laugh at what you call dissolution, And I know the amplitude of time. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@... wrote: Oh, if we're talking writers: Edgar Allan Poe - peerless. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: Thanks for being a good sport. I quite like the English, actually. But that cultural superiority thing is a bit outdated, don't you think? You may have Shakespeare, but we have, er . . . er . . . we have . . . OK, I'll get back to you on that one. Mark Twain. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita wrote: Excellent. That's a fair cop as we say over here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@... wrote: By the way: I don't think Brits have a superiority in the recognition of irony. It's more that Yanks and Brits are attuned differently. The fact that I missed this one and you missed some of mine rather nicely makes my point. (Seizing victory from the jaws of defeat!) Just wait until you get a load of the Canadian form of irony. In the meantime, there are also a fair amount of inadvertent irony posters here. And then there is Ravi...(love you Ravi.) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita wrote: Excellent. That's a fair cop as we say over here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
Its a weird thing being introduced to racist attitudes. Growing up I was always in the racial minority, though not completely elite, either, so I was really used to my friends being of any color or culture - didn't matter at all. Sure, everyone would make fun of everyone else, but not in a nasty way. The first black kid I was friends with was named Bill White, and he took some shit for it. I called him Bill What? A Japanese guy I worked with recently, called me a hard boiled egg - white on the outside, and yellow (asian) on the inside. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson mjackson74@... wrote: an excellent piece of writing Ravi From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 6:47 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot  Yes I think Mikey boy's right. Zimmerman had to act in self-defense against the racist, homophobic bigotry of African Americans, epitomized by Travyon. How can one not feel the pain and burden of Whites with their long history of slavery when African American landowners shipped them from Europe, then being confined to housing projects with rampant guns, drugs, cheap wine, cheap meat - coupled with systematic racism denying them employment opportunities forcing a cycle of white-on-white violence, high crime rate, alcoholism and drug abuse. The burden of being constantly profiled, harassed and abused by the predominantly African-American police. God I myself spent 3 years around housing projecting witnessing the pain and burden of Whites. Who can ever forget a bunch of African Americans torturing, tying the young homosexual Mathew Shepard to a fence and leaving him to die. My sympathies are with Whites, Mikey boy and Zimmerman. On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote:  Zimmerman defended his life from a person with an irrational fear of him. He had no other choice. From: feste37 feste37@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 2:57 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot  Maybe Trayvon thought that Zimmerman was an alien -- a creature from Mars or somewhere like that. It was Trayvon's irrational fear of extraterrestrial life that killed him. Zimmerman had nothing to do with it. --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@ wrote: Looks like a new version of the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is developing, see Drudge Report. Seems that on the Pierce Morgan Show last night that Rachel Jeantel reported that race had nothing to do with the encounter . She said that she and Trayvon thought Zimmerman might be a *rapist*,�a homosexual rapist at that and that's why Trayvon was Creeped-out by Zimmerman following him. He didn't want Zimmerman following him to his home because his little brother was there and might... It's looking more like Trayvon intended to give Zimmerman the Mathew Shepherd treatment. Martin intended to beat the snot out of the *fagot* that was stalking him. Zimmerman took a pounding for 45 seconds and then fired in self defense.�In short, Trayvon's homophobia killed him.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Trayvon Martin was a Homophobic bigot
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: I've always thought of Poe as a bit of a weirdo, actually, but we do have the peerless Whitman. Song of Myself is an astonishing poem, as astonishing to me now as it was over forty years ago when I first read it. There are not many poets who have written from the perspective of unity consciousness, but Whitman was one of them, and he did it in an absolutely original way. There is only one Walt. Here's part of it for anyone who might be interested and hasn't encountered it before. Is it not magnificent? from Song of Myself In all people I see myself, none more and not one a barley-corn less, And the good or bad I say of myself I say of them. I know I am solid and sound, To me the converging objects of the universe perpetually flow, All are written to me, and I must get what the writing means. I know I am deathless, I know this orbit of mine cannot be swept by a carpenter's compass, I know I shall not pass like a child's carlacue cut with a burnt stick at night. I know I am august, I do not trouble my spirit to vindicate itself or be understood, I see that the elementary laws never apologize, (I reckon I behave no prouder than the level I plant my house by, after all.) I exist as I am, that is enough, If no other in the world be aware I sit content, And if each and all be aware I sit content. One world is aware and by far the largest to me, and that is myself, And whether I come to my own to-day or in ten thousand or ten million years, I can cheerfully take it now, or with equal cheerfulness I can wait. My foothold is tenon'd and mortis'd in granite, I laugh at what you call dissolution, And I know the amplitude of time. Thanks for this, it speaks amplitudes and volumes. It is all-encompassing. And it has blood flowing through its veins. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@ wrote: Oh, if we're talking writers: Edgar Allan Poe - peerless. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: Thanks for being a good sport. I quite like the English, actually. But that cultural superiority thing is a bit outdated, don't you think? You may have Shakespeare, but we have, er . . . er . . . we have . . . OK, I'll get back to you on that one. Mark Twain. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita wrote: Excellent. That's a fair cop as we say over here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: Someone appears to have undergone an irony-bypass operation. Now, what was that you were saying a few days ago about British superiority in the recognition of irony? Time to eat humble pie. How ironic.
[FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share]
Excellent, Share. There really IS a resemblance, isn't there...in more ways than one. :-) But isn't it fascinating that the Ann-bot is following in her role model's footsteps by making suggestions about the deep, dark, secret meaning of us liking a movie that is now #1 at the box office in the US, the UK, France, and most other countries in which it opened? We -- the two people she has a rather obvious near-villainous obsession about herself, and who she spends almost all of her posts to FFL trying to get -- like the film because it's got despicable in the title, and we identify. :-) Next, Judy will hop on this bandwagon and -- without having seen either of the films -- will write a long review of both films, Apocalypto-style, badmouthing them and declaring that the directors (who are both spit French, y'know) are secretly trying to convert everyone in the world into the joys of EVIL. They have, after all, created two films in which the *heroes* are really not only villains, but *supervillains*! And they're getting kids (and their poor, duped parents, dragged along to the theaters) to *laugh* at these super- villains. It's a fiendish PLOT! It's all designed to keep people from perceiving Reality, which is of course defined as How we see things. :-) More seriously, wouldn't seeing *either* of these films do *both* of them a world of good? Try to imagine them sitting there trying to keep those classic mean old spinster scowls on their faces while watching Agnes, and Gru, and Lucy, and above all the minions cavort around. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: tee hee, turq I think I've found Gru's mother right here on FFL! From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: And yet here you are Judy, wasting one of your few remaining posts to reply to alleged gibberish?! Go figure! IOW, methinks the lady doth protest too much (-: Translation: Oh, shit, I screwed up *again*! She must not have meant whatever it was I thought she meant--*I* can't even figure out what I had in mind now, but I was sure it was going to just SMITE the bitch and I was going to *win* one for once to show my pastoral counselor. Well, I'll just have to try to brazen it out as I usually do when I foul up, although sometimes I have the scary feeling that maybe I'm not all that convincing. No, no, I can't think about that or I'll go crazy...I can't bear that much reality. Somebody, HELP MEEE!! From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 11:06 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] Does anybody have *any* idea what the loon's problem is? Both of her posts have been complete gibberish. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Emily, excerpted from Judy's post to which I was referring: Whatever he may have said or not said to you in private weeks ago...There is no basis for you to demand behind-the-scenes negotiations. So your use of *dishonest place* doesn't make sense to me! From: Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 1:42 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] words and connotations was Barry's private emails [was Re: Four for Share] snip Also, Share, nothing you said here makes any sense at all. ÃâàJust an observation for you. ÃâàEvery time you sink into some kind of revenge post - it backfires on you because you can't think clearly from a dishonest place. ÃâàÃâàOn Jul 15, 2013, at 7:13 AM, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Ravi and Doc, yep funny how Judy and others referred to Robin's emails to me as private whereas when she referred to my alleged demands for such, she used the term behind the scenes. So, Robin sends private emails to Share but Share *demands* emails that are *behind the scenes* Go figure! Here's an editorial exercise exploring connotations by reversing Judy's wordings: Last month Robin emailed Share *behind the scenes.* AND Share has demanded that the upsets between her and Robin be discussed via private emails. Private and demanded being Judy's word choices. Share says: I have requested that Robin and I discuss our upsets via direct, offline emails.
